a-small-scale-setup-for-algal-toxicity-testing-nanomaterials-other

A Small-Scale Setup for Algal Toxicity Testing of Nanomaterials and Other Difficult Substances

Ecotoxicity data is a requirement for pre- and post-market registration of chemicals by European and international regulations (e.g., REACH). The algal ...

Technical University of Denmark

Balancing scientific tensions.

A certain shade of green: Can algal pigments reveal shading effects of nanoparticles?

The use of alternatives assessment to substitute hazardous chemicals with inherently safer options is gaining momentum worldwide as a legislative and corporate strategy to minimize consumer, occupational, and environmental risks. Engineered nanomaterials represent an interesting case for alternatives assessment approaches, because they can be considered both emerging "chemicals" of concern, as well as potentially safer alternatives to hazardous chemicals. However, comparing the hazards of nanomaterials to traditional chemicals or to other nanomaterials is challenging, and critical elements in chemical hazard and exposure assessment may have to be fundamentally altered to sufficiently address nanomaterials. The aim of this paper is to assess the overall applicability of alternatives assessment methods for nanomaterials and to outline recommendations to enhance their use in this context. The present paper focuses on the adaptability of existing hazard and exposure assessment approaches to engineered nanomaterials as well as strategies to design inherently safer nanomaterials. We argue that alternatives assessment for nanomaterials is complicated by the sheer number of nanomaterials possible. As a result, the inclusion of new data tools that can efficiently and effectively evaluate nanomaterials as substitutes is needed to strengthen the alternatives assessment process. However, we conclude that with additional tools to enhance traditional hazard and exposure assessment modules of alternatives assessment, such as the use of mechanistic toxicity screens and control banding tools, alternatives assessment can be adapted to evaluate engineered nanomaterials as potential substitutes for chemicals of concern and to ensure safer nanomaterials are incorporated in the design of new products. Integr Environ Assess Manag 2017;13:177-187. © 2016 SETAC.

The applicability of chemical alternatives assessment for engineered nanomaterials.

The number of products on the market containing engineered nanoparticles (ENPs) has increased significantly, and concerns have been raised regarding their ecotoxicological effects. Environmental safety assessments as well as relevant and reliable ecotoxicological data are required for the safe and sustainable use of ENPs. Although the number of publications on the ecotoxicological effects and uptake of ENPs is rapidly expanding, the applicability of the reported data for hazard assessment is questionable. A major knowledge gap is whether nanoparticle effects occur when test organisms are exposed to ENPs in aquatic test systems. Filling this gap is not straightforward, because of the broad range of ENPs and the different behavior of ENPs compared to "ordinary" (dissolved) chemicals in the ecotoxicity test systems. The risk of generating false negatives, and false positives, in the currently used tests is high, and in most cases difficult to assess. This Review outlines some of the pitfalls in the aquatic toxicity testing of ENPs which may lead to misinterpretation of test results. Response types are also proposed to reveal potential nanoparticle effects in the aquatic test organisms.

Aquatic Ecotoxicity Testing of Nanoparticles-The Quest To Disclose Nanoparticle Effects.

"Safety by design" (SbD) is an intuitively appealing concept that is on the rise within nanotoxicology and nanosafety research, as well as within nanotechnology research policy. It leans on principles established within drug discovery and development (DDD) and seeks to address safety early, as well as throughout product development. However, it remains unclear what the concept of SbD exactly entails for engineered nanomaterials (ENMs) or how it is envisioned to be implemented. Here, we review the concept as it is emerging in European research and compare its resemblance with the safety testing and assessment practices in DDD. From this comparison, it is clear that "safety" is not obtained through DDD, and that SbD should be considered a starting point rather than an end, meaning that products will still need to progress through thorough safety evaluations and regulation. We conclude that although risk reduction is clearly desirable, the way SbD is currently communicated tends to treat safety as an inherent material property and that this is fundamentally problematic as it represents a recasting and reduction of societal issues into technical problems. SbD therefore faces a multitude of challenges, from practical implementation to unrealistic stakeholder expectations.

What can nanosafety learn from drug development? The feasibility of "safety by design".

Nanoremediation with iron (Fe) nanomaterials opens new doors for treating contaminated soil and groundwater, but is also accompanied by new potential risks as large quantities of engineered nanomaterials are introduced into the environment. In this study, we have assessed the ecotoxicity of four engineered Fe nanomaterials, specifically, Nano-Goethite, Trap-Ox Fe-zeolites, Carbo-Iron and FerMEG12, developed within the European FP7 project NanoRem for sub-surface remediation towards a test battery consisting of eight ecotoxicity tests on bacteria (V. fisheri, E. coli), algae (P. subcapitata, Chlamydomonas sp.), crustaceans (D. magna), worms (E. fetida, L. variegatus) and plants (R. sativus, L. multiflorum). The tested materials are commercially available and include Fe oxide and nanoscale zero valent iron (nZVI), but also hybrid products with Fe loaded into a matrix. All but one material, a ball milled nZVI (FerMEG12), showed no toxicity in the test battery when tested in concentrations up to 100 mg/L, which is the cutoff for hazard labeling in chemicals regulation in Europe. However it should be noted that Fe nanomaterials proved challenging to test adequately due to their turbidity, aggregation and sedimentation behavior in aqueous media. This paper provides a number of recommendations concerning future testing of Fe nanomaterials and discusses environmental risk assessment considerations related to these.

Ecotoxicity testing and environmental risk assessment of iron nanomaterials for sub-surface remediation - Recommendations from the FP7 project NanoRem.

The shortfall of risk assessment for decision-making.

The last two decades have seen a rise in the development of lanthanum (III)-containing materials (LM) for controlling phosphate in the aquatic environment. >70 papers have been published on this topic in the peer-reviewed literature, but mechanisms of phosphate removal by LM as well as potential environmental impacts of LM remain unclear. In this review, we summarize peer-reviewed scientific articles on the development and use of 80 different types of LM in terms of prospective benefits, potential ecological impacts, and research needs. We find that the main benefits of LM for phosphate removal are their ability to strongly bind phosphate under diverse environmental conditions (e.g., over a wide pH range, in the presence of diverse aqueous constituents). The maximum phosphate uptake capacity of LM correlates primarily with the La content of LM, whereas reaction kinetics are influenced by LM formulation and ambient environmental conditions (e.g., pH, presence of co-existing ions, ligands, organic matter). Increased La solubilization can occur under some environmental conditions, including at moderately acidic pH values (i.e., < 4.5-5.6), highly saline conditions, and in the presence of organic matter. At the same time, dissolved La will likely undergo hydrolysis, bind to organic matter, and combine with phosphate to precipitate rhabdophane (LaPO·HO), all of which reduce the bioavailability of La in aquatic environments. Overall, LM use presents a low risk of adverse effects in water with pH > 7 and moderate-to-high bicarbonate alkalinity, although caution should be applied when considering LM use in aquatic systems with acidic pH values and low bicarbonate alkalinity. Moving forward, we recommend additional research dedicated to understanding La release from LM under diverse environmental conditions as well as long-term exposures on ecological organisms, particularly primary producers and benthic organisms. Further, site-specific monitoring could be useful for evaluating potential impacts of LM on both biotic and abiotic systems post-application.

Article	Year
Balancing scientific tensions. Nature nanotechnology\| PubMed ID: 25370421	2014
A certain shade of green: Can algal pigments reveal shading effects of nanoparticles? Integrated environmental assessment and management\| PubMed ID: 26632196	2016
The applicability of chemical alternatives assessment for engineered nanomaterials. Integrated environmental assessment and management\| PubMed ID: 26887668	2017
Aquatic Ecotoxicity Testing of Nanoparticles-The Quest To Disclose Nanoparticle Effects. Angewandte Chemie (International ed. in English)\| PubMed ID: 27564250	2016
What can nanosafety learn from drug development? The feasibility of "safety by design". Nanotoxicology\| PubMed ID: 28303735	2017
Ecotoxicity testing and environmental risk assessment of iron nanomaterials for sub-surface remediation - Recommendations from the FP7 project NanoRem. Chemosphere\| PubMed ID: 28521168	2017
The shortfall of risk assessment for decision-making. Nature nanotechnology\| PubMed ID: 29209011	2017
Emerging lanthanum (III)-containing materials for phosphate removal from water: A review towards future developments. Environment international\| PubMed ID: 32949878	2020

Rune Hjorth

Biography

JoVE Journal Publications

Other Publications