4.7 Review

Evaluation of Ecotoxicology Assessment Methods of Nanomaterials and Their Effects

期刊

NANOMATERIALS
卷 10, 期 4, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/nano10040610

关键词

nanomaterials; organisms suitable for simple and rapid ecotoxicity testing SSRET; ecotoxicological test batteries; ecotoxicology

资金

  1. ERA-Net COFASP Project Polymeric NanoBioMaterials for drug delivery: developing and implementation of safe-by-design concept enabling safe healthcare solutions (Romanian National Authority for Scientific Research UEFISCDI) [PN3-P3-285/14/2017]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This paper describes the ecotoxicological effects of nanomaterials (NMs) as well as their testing methods. Standard ecotoxicity testing methods are applicable to nanomaterials as well but require some adaptation. We have taken into account methods that meet several conditions. They must be properly researched by a minimum of ten scientific articles where adaptation of the method to the NMs is also presented; use organisms suitable for simple and rapid ecotoxicity testing (SSRET); have a test period shorter than 30 days; require no special equipment; have low costs and have the possibility of optimization for high-throughput screening. From the standard assays described in guidelines developed by organizations such as Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development and United States Environmental Protection Agency, which meet the required conditions, we selected as methods adaptable for NMs, some methods based on algae, duckweed, amphipods, daphnids, chironomids, terrestrial plants, nematodes and earthworms. By analyzing the effects of NMs on a wide range of organisms, it has been observed that these effects can be of several categories, such as behavioral, morphological, cellular, molecular or genetic effects. By comparing the EC50 values of some NMs it has been observed that such values are available mainly for aquatic ecotoxicity, with the most sensitive test being the algae assay. The most toxic NMs overall were the silver NMs.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据