4.6 Article

Comparison of the Toxicity of Pristine Graphene and Graphene Oxide, Using Four Biological Models

Journal

MATERIALS
Volume 14, Issue 15, Pages -

Publisher

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/ma14154250

Keywords

graphene; graphene oxide; toxicity; biological models

Funding

  1. National Science Center in Poland [2016/23/D/NZ9/01401, 2015/19/D/NZ8/03871]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Graphene has various applications in biomedicine, with delivery systems, sensors, tissue engineering, and biological agents being the main areas. Toxicity analysis of pristine graphene (PG) and graphene oxide (GO) on different biological models showed higher toxicity at higher doses. The differences in toxicity between the forms of graphene are due to their physicochemical properties and the specific biological model used for testing.
There are numerous applications of graphene in biomedicine and they can be classified into several main areas: delivery systems, sensors, tissue engineering and biological agents. The growing biomedical field of applications of graphene and its derivates raises questions regarding their toxicity. We will demonstrate an analysis of the toxicity of two forms of graphene using four various biological models: zebrafish (Danio rerio) embryo, duckweed (Lemna minor), human HS-5 cells and bacteria (Staphylococcus aureus). The toxicity of pristine graphene (PG) and graphene oxide (GO) was tested at concentrations of 5, 10, 20, 50 and 100 mu g/mL. Higher toxicity was noted after administration of high doses of PG and GO in all tested biological models. Hydrophilic GO shows greater toxicity to biological models living in the entire volume of the culture medium (zebrafish, duckweed, S. aureus). PG showed the highest toxicity to adherent cells growing on the bottom of the culture plates-human HS-5 cells. The differences in toxicity between the tested graphene materials result from their physicochemical properties and the model used. Dose-dependent toxicity has been demonstrated with both forms of graphene.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available