Practical considerations for conducting ecotoxicity test methods with manufactured nanomaterials: what have we learnt so far?

This review paper reports the consensus of a technical workshop hosted by the European network, NanoImpactNet (NIN). The workshop aimed to review the collective experience of working at the bench with manufactured nanomaterials (MNMs), and to recommend modifications to existing experimental methods and OECD protocols. Current procedures for cleaning glassware are appropriate for most MNMs, although interference with electrodes may occur. Maintaining exposure is more difficult with MNMs compared to conventional chemicals. A metal salt control is recommended for experiments with metallic MNMs that may release free metal ions. Dispersing agents should be avoided, but if they must be used, then natural or synthetic dispersing agents are possible, and dispersion controls essential. Time constraints and technology gaps indicate that full characterisation of test media during ecotoxicity tests is currently not practical. Details of electron microscopy, dark-field microscopy, a range of spectroscopic methods (EDX, XRD, XANES, EXAFS), light scattering techniques (DLS, SLS) and chromatography are discussed. The development of user-friendly software to predict particle behaviour in test media according to DLVO theory is in progress, and simple optical methods are available to estimate the settling behaviour of suspensions during experiments. However, for soil matrices such simple approaches may not be applicable. Alternatively, a Critical Body Residue approach may be taken in which body concentrations in organisms are related to effects, and toxicity thresholds derived. For microbial assays, the cell wall is a formidable barrier to MNMs and end points that rely on the test substance penetrating the cell may be insensitive. Instead assays based on the cell envelope should be developed for MNMs. In algal growth tests, the abiotic factors that promote particle aggregation in the media (e.g. ionic strength) are also important in providing nutrients, and manipulation of the media to control the dispersion may also inhibit growth. Controls to quantify shading effects, and precise details of lighting regimes, shaking or mixing should be reported in algal tests. Photosynthesis may be more sensitive than traditional growth end points for algae and plants. Tests with invertebrates should consider non-chemical toxicity from particle adherence to the organisms. The use of semi-static exposure methods with fish can reduce the logistical issues of waste water disposal and facilitate aspects of animal husbandry relevant to MMNs. There are concerns that the existing bioaccumulation tests are conceptually flawed for MNMs and that new test(s) are required. In vitro testing strategies, as exemplified by genotoxicity assays, can be modified for MNMs, but the risk of false negatives in some assays is highlighted. In conclusion, most protocols will require some modifications and recommendations are made to aid the researcher at the bench. [Authors]

Comparison of three acellular tests for assessing the oxidation potential of nanomaterials

Great effort is put into developing reliable, predictive, high-throughput, and low-cost screening approaches for the toxicity evaluation of ambient and manufactured nanoparticles (NP). These tests often consider oxidative reactivity, as oxidative stress is a well-documented pathway in particle toxicology. Based on a panel of six carbonaceous and five metal/metal oxide (Me/MeOx) nanoparticles, we: (i) compared the specifications (linearity, detection limits, repeatability) of three acellular reactivity tests using either dithiothreitol (DTT assay), dichlorofluorescein (DCFH assay), or ascorbic acid (AA-assay) as the reducing agent; and (ii) evaluated which physicochemical properties were important for explaining the observed reactivity. The selected AA assay was found to be neither sensitive nor robust enough to be retained. For the other tests, the surface properties of carbonaceous NP were of utmost importance for explaining their reactivity. In particular, the presence of "strongly reducing" surface functions explained most of its DCFH reactivity and a large part of its DTT reactivity. For the selected Me/MeOx, a different picture emerged. Whereas all particles were able to oxidize DCFH, dissolution and complexation processes could additionally influence the measured reactivity, as observed using the DTT assay. This study suggests that a combination of the DTT and DCFH assays provides complementary information relative to the quantification of the oxidative capacity of NP.

Development of a specific control banding tool for nanomaterials : report

[Table des matières] 1. Introduction to the control banding method : Nanomaterials and occupational risk assessment; Alternative method known as control banding; Scope and limits of control banding. - 2. Control banding process applied to manufactured nanomaterials: General points; Operating principle. - 3. Implementation of control banding: Gathering of information; Hazard bands; Exposure bands; Allocation of risk control bands. - 4. Bibliography: Publications; Books, reports, opinions, bulletins; Standards and references; Legislation and regulations; Websites. - Annexes

Development of a control banding tool for nanomaterials

Control banding (CB) can be a useful tool for managing the potential risks of nanomaterials. The here proposed CB, which should be part of an overall risk control strategy, groups materials by hazard and emission potential. The resulting decision matrix proposes control bands adapted to the risk potential levels and helps define an action plan. If this plan is not practical and financially feasible, a full risk assessment is launched. The hazard banding combines key concepts of nanomaterial toxicology: translocation across biological barriers, fibrous nature, solubility, and reactivity. Already existing classifications specific to the nanomaterial can be used "as is." Otherwise, the toxicity of bulk or analogous substances gives an initial hazard band, which is increased if the substance is not easily soluble or if it has a higher reactivity than the substance. The emission potential bands are defined by the nanomaterials' physical form and process characteristics. Quantities, frequencies, and existing control measures are taken into account during the definition of the action plan. Control strategies range from room ventilation to full containment with expert advice. This CB approach, once validated, can be easily embedded in risk management systems. It allows integrating new toxicity data and needs no exposure data. [Authors]

Management of nanomaterials safety in research environment

Despite numerous discussions, workshops, reviews and reports about responsible development of nanotechnology, information describing health and environmental risk of engineered nanoparticles or nanomaterials is severely lacking and thus insufficient for completing rigorous risk assessment on their use. However, since preliminary scientific evaluations indicate that there are reasonable suspicions that activities involving nanomaterials might have damaging effects on human health; the precautionary principle must be applied. Public and private institutions as well as industries have the duty to adopt preventive and protective measures proportionate to the risk intensity and the desired level of protection. In this work, we present a practical, 'user-friendly' procedure for a university-wide safety and health management of nanomaterials, developed as a multi-stakeholder effort (government, accident insurance, researchers and experts for occupational safety and health). The process starts using a schematic decision tree that allows classifying the nano laboratory into three hazard classes similar to a control banding approach (from Nano 3 - highest hazard to Nano1 - lowest hazard). Classifying laboratories into risk classes would require considering actual or potential exposure to the nanomaterial as well as statistical data on health effects of exposure. Due to the fact that these data (as well as exposure limits for each individual material) are not available, risk classes could not be determined. For each hazard level we then provide a list of required risk mitigation measures (technical, organizational and personal). The target 'users' of this safety and health methodology are researchers and safety officers. They can rapidly access the precautionary hazard class of their activities and the corresponding adequate safety and health measures. We succeed in convincing scientist dealing with nano-activities that adequate safety measures and management are promoting innovation and discoveries by ensuring them a safe environment even in the case of very novel products. The proposed measures are not considered as constraints but as a support to their research. This methodology is being implemented at the Ecole Polytechnique de Lausanne in over 100 research labs dealing with nanomaterials. It is our opinion that it would be useful to other research and academia institutions as well. [Authors]

LAYERED DOUBLE HYDROXIDES: NANOMATERIALS FOR APPLICATIONS IN AGRICULTURE

The current research aims to introduce Layered Double Hydroxides (LDH) as nanomaterials to be used in agriculture, with particular reference to its use as storage and slow release matrix of nutrients and agrochemicals for plant growing. Structural characteristics, main properties, synthesis methods and characterization of LDH were covered in this study. Moreover, some literature data have been reported to demonstrate their potential for storage and slow release of nitrate, phosphate, agrochemicals, besides as being used as adsorbent for the wastewater treatment. This research aims to expand, in near future, the investigation field on these materials, with application in agriculture, increasing the interface between chemistry and agronomy.

Minimal analytical characterisation of engineered nanomaterials need for hazard assessment in biological matrices

The safe and responsible development of engineered nanomaterials (ENM), nanotechnology-based materials and products, together with the definition of regulatory measures and implementation of "nano"-legislation in Europe require a widely supported scientific basis and sufficient high quality data upon which to base decisions. At the very core of such a scientific basis is a general agreement on key issues related to risk assessment of ENMs which encompass the key parameters to characterise ENMs, appropriate methods of analysis and best approach to express the effect of ENMs in widely accepted dose response toxicity tests. The following major conclusions were drawn: Due to high batch variability of ENMs characteristics of commercially available and to a lesser degree laboratory made ENMs it is not possible to make general statements regarding the toxicity resulting from exposure to ENMs. 1) Concomitant with using the OECD priority list of ENMs, other criteria for selection of ENMs like relevance for mechanistic (scientific) studies or risk assessment-based studies, widespread availability (and thus high expected volumes of use) or consumer concern (route of consumer exposure depending on application) could be helpful. The OECD priority list is focussing on validity of OECD tests. Therefore source material will be first in scope for testing. However for risk assessment it is much more relevant to have toxicity data from material as present in products/matrices to which men and environment are be exposed. 2) For most, if not all characteristics of ENMs, standardized methods analytical methods, though not necessarily validated, are available. Generally these methods are only able to determine one single characteristic and some of them can be rather expensive. Practically, it is currently not feasible to fully characterise ENMs. Many techniques that are available to measure the same nanomaterial characteristic produce contrasting results (e.g. reported sizes of ENMs). It was recommended that at least two complementary techniques should be employed to determine a metric of ENMs. The first great challenge is to prioritise metrics which are relevant in the assessment of biological dose response relations and to develop analytical methods for characterising ENMs in biological matrices. It was generally agreed that one metric is not sufficient to describe fully ENMs. 3) Characterisation of ENMs in biological matrices starts with sample preparation. It was concluded that there currently is no standard approach/protocol for sample preparation to control agglomeration/aggregation and (re)dispersion. It was recommended harmonization should be initiated and that exchange of protocols should take place. The precise methods used to disperse ENMs should be specifically, yet succinctly described within the experimental section of a publication. 4) ENMs need to be characterised in the matrix as it is presented to the test system (in vitro/ in vivo). 5) Alternative approaches (e.g. biological or in silico systems) for the characterisation of ENMS are simply not possible with the current knowledge. Contributors: Iseult Lynch, Hans Marvin, Kenneth Dawson, Markus Berges, Diane Braguer, Hugh J. Byrne, Alan Casey, Gordon Chambers, Martin Clift, Giuliano Elia1, Teresa F. Fernandes, Lise Fjellsbø, Peter Hatto, Lucienne Juillerat, Christoph Klein, Wolfgang Kreyling, Carmen Nickel1, and Vicki Stone.

Minimal analytical characterization of engineered nanomaterials needed for hazard assessment in biological matrices.

Abstract This paper presents the outcomes from a workshop of the European Network on the Health and Environmental Impact of Nanomaterials (NanoImpactNet). During the workshop, 45 experts in the field of safety assessment of engineered nanomaterials addressed the need to systematically study sets of engineered nanomaterials with specific metrics to generate a data set which would allow the establishment of dose-response relations. The group concluded that international cooperation and worldwide standardization of terminology, reference materials and protocols are needed to make progress in establishing lists of essential metrics. High quality data necessitates the development of harmonized study approaches and adequate reporting of data. Priority metrics can only be based on well-characterized dose-response relations derived from the systematic study of the bio-kinetics and bio-interactions of nanomaterials at both organism and (sub)-cellular levels. In addition, increased effort is needed to develop and validate analytical methods to determine these metrics in a complex matrix.