4.8 Article

Core Structure and Surface Functionalization of Carbon Nanomaterials Alter Impacts to Daphnid Mortality, Reproduction, and Growth: Acute Assays Do Not Predict Chronic Exposure Impacts

Journal

ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY
Volume 47, Issue 16, Pages 9444-9452

Publisher

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/es4030595

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. National Science Foundation [CBET 933720]
  2. Charles A. and Anne Morrow Lindbergh Foundation
  3. School of Freshwater Sciences at University of Wisconsin Milwaukee

Ask authors/readers for more resources

There are currently over ninety products incorporating carbon nanomaterials (CNMs) on the market today for a variety of applications. Modifications in core structure and surface chemistry of manufactured nanomaterials are used to optimize nanomaterials for specific uses. However, there is a notable lack of information on how core structure and surface chemistry may alter toxicity in low-level, chronic exposures. This paper examines the effects of twelve CNMs that differ in their core structure and surface chemistry to Daphnia magna over a 21-day chronic exposure. Overall, nanomaterials with a carbon nanotube core were more toxic to daphnids than fullerenes, with the one exception of fullerenes with a gamma-cyclodextrin surface chemistry. Acute mortality was not a good predictor of chronic effects as none of the CNMs induced toxicity at tested concentrations after 48 h, yet chronic assays indicated significant differences in mortality, reproduction, and growth realized after 21 days. Our results indicate that (1) acute exposure assays do not accurately describe the impact of CNMs to biological systems, (2) chronic exposures provide valuable information that indicates the potential for different modes of action for nanomaterials of differing chemistries, and (3) core structure and surface chemistry both influence particle toxicity.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available