4.7 Article

Carbon nanotubes: Structural defects as stressors inducing lung cell toxicity

Journal

CHEMICO-BIOLOGICAL INTERACTIONS
Volume 382, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

ELSEVIER IRELAND LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.cbi.2023.110613

Keywords

Carbon nanotubes; Cytotoxicity; Raman spectroscopy; Oxidative potential; Structural defects; Stressors

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The role of structural defects in carbon nanotubes (CNTs) as organic stressors triggering their potential toxicity is investigated. The amount of structural defects is estimated through Raman spectroscopy, and CNTs with more defects are found to induce more oxidative stress, cytotoxicity, and cellular damage.
Lung toxicity of carbon nanotubes (CNTs) is matter of concern since very long time. However, their mechanism of toxicity is still not yet well defined. In this work, the role of structural defects as organic stressors of CNTs able to trigger their potential toxicity is investigated. Four commercial CNTs, with different carbon purity grade, are morphologically characterized by transmission electron microscopy (TEM) and the relative amount of structural defects are estimated through Raman spectroscopy, by measuring the intensity ratio D/G (ID/IG). The oxidative potential of CNTs is evaluated with cytochrome-C assay and reactive oxygen species (ROS) detection. Data show that CNTs with larger amounts of structural defects (higher ID/IG ratio) induce an increased ROS generation and consequent cytotoxicity and cellular damage, shown by TEM images of CNTs-cells interaction. Raman analyses of cells exposed to CNTs point out that the spectra of the CNTs inside the cells show no differences with respect of the signal recorded for cell-free CNTs, evidencing their biopersistence in lung cells. Raman spectra cannot provide direct indication of the existence of metals as impurity. It follows that the intensity ratio ID/IG can be taken as a predictive marker of the toxicity of a given CNT.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available