Ecological nanotoxicology: integrating nanomaterial hazard considerations across the subcellular, population, community, and ecosystems levels.

Research into the health and environmental safety of nanotechnology has seriously lagged behind its emergence in industry. While humans have often adopted synthetic chemicals without considering ancillary consequences, the lessons learned from worldwide pollution should motivate making nanotechnology compatible with environmental concerns. Researchers and policymakers need to understand exposure and harm of engineered nanomaterials (ENMs), currently nanotechnology's main products, to influence the ENM industry toward sustainable growth. Yet, how should research proceed? Standard toxicity testing anchored in single-organism, dose-response characterizations does not adequately represent real-world exposure and receptor scenarios and their complexities. Our approach is different: it derives from ecology, the study of organisms' interactions with each other and their environments. Our approach involves the characterization of ENMs and the mechanistic assessment of their property-based effects. Using high throughput/content screening (HTS/HCS) with cells or environmentally-relevant organisms, we measure the effects of ENMs on a subcellular or population level. We then relate those effects to mechanisms within dynamic energy budget (DEB) models of growth and reproduction. We reconcile DEB model predictions with experimental data on organism and population responses. Finally, we use microcosm studies to measure the potential for community- or ecosystem-level effects by ENMs that are likely to be produced in large quantities and for which either HTS/HCS or DEB modeling suggest their potential to harm populations and ecosystems. Our approach accounts for ecological interactions across scales, from within organisms to whole ecosystems. Organismal ENM effects, if propagated through populations, can alter communities comprising multiple populations (e.g., plant, fish, bacteria) within food webs. Altered communities can change ecosystem services: processes that cycle carbon, nutrients, and energy, and regulate Earth's waters and atmosphere. We have shown ENM effects on populations, communities, and ecosystems, including transfer and concentration of ENMs through food chains, for a range of exposure scenarios; in many cases, we have identified subcellular ENM effects mechanisms. To keep pace with ENM development, rapid assessment of the mechanisms of ENM effects and modeling are needed. DEB models provide a method for mathematically representing effects such as the generation of reactive oxygen species and their associated damage. These models account for organism-level effects on metabolism and reproduction and can predict outcomes of ENM-organism combinations on populations; those predictions can then suggest ENM characteristics to be avoided. HTS/HCS provides a rapid assessment tool of the ENM chemical characteristics that affect biological systems; such results guide and expand DEB model expressions of hazard. Our approach addresses ecological processes in both natural and managed ecosystems (agriculture) and has the potential to deliver timely and meaningful understanding towards environmentally sustainable nanotechnology.

[1]  Bas Kooijman,et al.  Dynamic Energy Budget Theory for Metabolic Organisation , 2005 .

[2]  T. Xia,et al.  Toxic Potential of Materials at the Nanolevel , 2006, Science.

[3]  Hansruedi Siegrist,et al.  Behavior of metallic silver nanoparticles in a pilot wastewater treatment plant. , 2011, Environmental science & technology.

[4]  J. Peralta-Videa,et al.  Spectroscopic verification of zinc absorption and distribution in the desert plant Prosopis juliflora-velutina (velvet mesquite) treated with ZnO nanoparticles. , 2011, Chemical engineering journal.

[5]  Arturo A Keller,et al.  Impacts of metal oxide nanoparticles on marine phytoplankton. , 2010, Environmental science & technology.

[6]  Yuan Ge,et al.  Soybean susceptibility to manufactured nanomaterials with evidence for food quality and soil fertility interruption , 2012, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[7]  Jose R Peralta-Videa,et al.  Interaction of nanoparticles with edible plants and their possible implications in the food chain. , 2011, Journal of agricultural and food chemistry.

[8]  Arturo A. Keller,et al.  TiO2 Nanoparticles Are Phototoxic to Marine Phytoplankton , 2012, PloS one.

[9]  S. Holbrook,et al.  Sublethal toxicant effects with dynamic energy budget theory: application to mussel outplants , 2009, Ecotoxicology.

[10]  Patricia A. Holden,et al.  Modeling Physiological Processes That Relate Toxicant Exposure and Bacterial Population Dynamics , 2012, PloS one.

[11]  Sebastiaan A.L.M. Kooijman,et al.  Dynamic Energy and Mass Budgets in Biological Systems , 2000 .

[12]  Lutz Mädler,et al.  Decreased dissolution of ZnO by iron doping yields nanoparticles with reduced toxicity in the rodent lung and zebrafish embryos. , 2011, ACS nano.

[13]  Tjalling Jager,et al.  A biology-based approach for quantitative structure-activity relationships (QSARs) in ecotoxicity , 2009, Ecotoxicology.

[14]  Yuan Ge,et al.  Evidence for negative effects of TiO2 and ZnO nanoparticles on soil bacterial communities. , 2011, Environmental science & technology.

[15]  S. Kooijman,et al.  Quantitative aspects of metabolic organization: a discussion of concepts. , 2001, Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences.

[16]  C. Gagnon,et al.  Ecotoxicity of CdTe quantum dots to freshwater mussels: impacts on immune system, oxidative stress and genotoxicity. , 2008, Aquatic toxicology.

[17]  Yuan Ge,et al.  Identification of Soil Bacteria Susceptible to TiO2 and ZnO Nanoparticles , 2012, Applied and Environmental Microbiology.

[18]  Patricia A Holden,et al.  Effects of soluble cadmium salts versus CdSe quantum dots on the growth of planktonic Pseudomonas aeruginosa. , 2009, Environmental science & technology.

[19]  Guadalupe de la Rosa,et al.  Evidence of the differential biotransformation and genotoxicity of ZnO and CeO2 nanoparticles on soybean (Glycine max) plants. , 2010, Environmental science & technology.

[20]  M Boller,et al.  Synthetic TiO2 nanoparticle emission from exterior facades into the aquatic environment. , 2008, Environmental pollution.

[21]  Loring Nies,et al.  Impact of fullerene (C60) on a soil microbial community. , 2007, Environmental science & technology.

[22]  R. Nisbet,et al.  Impact of engineered zinc oxide nanoparticles on the energy budgets of Mytilus galloprovincialis , 2014 .

[23]  R. Scholz,et al.  Modeled environmental concentrations of engineered nanomaterials (TiO(2), ZnO, Ag, CNT, Fullerenes) for different regions. , 2009, Environmental science & technology.

[24]  Steven F. Railsback,et al.  Individual-based modeling and ecology , 2005 .

[25]  R. Nisbet,et al.  Sublethal toxicant effects with dynamic energy budget theory: model formulation , 2009, Ecotoxicology.

[26]  Sebastiaan A.L.M. Kooijman,et al.  Estimation of no effect concentrations from exposure experiments when values scatter among individuals , 2009 .

[27]  R. O'Neill,et al.  The value of the world's ecosystem services and natural capital , 1997, Nature.

[28]  P. Frickers,et al.  Lysosomal cytotoxicity of carbon nanoparticles in cells of the molluscan immune system: An in vitro study , 2009 .

[29]  Mihail C. Roco,et al.  The long view of nanotechnology development: the National Nanotechnology Initiative at 10 years , 2011 .

[30]  Arturo A Keller,et al.  Influence of natural organic matter on the aggregation and deposition of titanium dioxide nanoparticles. , 2011, Journal of hazardous materials.

[31]  Jamie R Lead,et al.  Nanomaterials in the environment: Behavior, fate, bioavailability, and effects , 2008, Environmental toxicology and chemistry.

[32]  Albert A Koelmans,et al.  Analysis of engineered nanomaterials in complex matrices (environment and biota): General considerations and conceptual case studies , 2012, Environmental toxicology and chemistry.

[33]  H. O N G T A O W A N G,et al.  Stability and Aggregation of Metal Oxide Nanoparticles in Natural Aqueous Matrices , 2010 .

[34]  S. Kooijman,et al.  From molecules to ecosystems through dynamic energy budget models. , 2000 .

[35]  Detlef Günther,et al.  No evidence for cerium dioxide nanoparticle translocation in maize plants. , 2010, Environmental science & technology.

[36]  William A. Nelson,et al.  Small-amplitude cycles emerge from stage-structured interactions in Daphnia–algal systems , 2008, Nature.

[37]  Tjalling Jager,et al.  Some good reasons to ban ECx and related concepts in ecotoxicology. , 2011, Environmental science & technology.

[38]  Tjalling Jager,et al.  A biology-based approach for mixture toxicity of multiple endpoints over the life cycle , 2009, Ecotoxicology.

[39]  S. Kooijman,et al.  Dynamic energy budget theory restores coherence in biology , 2010, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences.

[40]  M A Kiser,et al.  Titanium nanomaterial removal and release from wastewater treatment plants. , 2009, Environmental science & technology.

[41]  Erik K Richman,et al.  The nanomaterial characterization bottleneck. , 2009, ACS nano.

[42]  J. Peralta-Videa,et al.  Toxicity and biotransformation of ZnO nanoparticles in the desert plants Prosopis juliflora-velutina, Salsola tragus and Parkinsonia florida , 2011 .

[43]  Tin Klanjscek,et al.  Dynamic energy budget approach to modeling mechanisms of CdSe quantum dot toxicity , 2013, Ecotoxicology.

[44]  G. Stucky,et al.  Biomagnification of cadmium selenide quantum dots in a simple experimental microbial food chain. , 2011, Nature nanotechnology.

[45]  Cheryl A Murphy,et al.  Adverse outcome pathways and ecological risk assessment: Bridging to population‐level effects , 2011, Environmental toxicology and chemistry.

[46]  Guadalupe de la Rosa,et al.  X-ray absorption spectroscopy (XAS) corroboration of the uptake and storage of CeO(2) nanoparticles and assessment of their differential toxicity in four edible plant species. , 2010, Journal of agricultural and food chemistry.

[47]  Benjamin P Colman,et al.  An ecological perspective on nanomaterial impacts in the environment. , 2010, Journal of environmental quality.

[48]  R W Scholz,et al.  Engineered nanomaterials in rivers--exposure scenarios for Switzerland at high spatial and temporal resolution. , 2011, Environmental pollution.

[49]  Daniel L Villeneuve,et al.  Adverse outcome pathways: A conceptual framework to support ecotoxicology research and risk assessment , 2010, Environmental toxicology and chemistry.

[50]  P. R. Sislian,et al.  Dispersion of TiO2 Nanoparticle Agglomerates by Pseudomonas aeruginosa , 2010, Applied and Environmental Microbiology.

[51]  Antonio Marcomini,et al.  Immunotoxicity of carbon black nanoparticles to blue mussel hemocytes. , 2008, Environment international.

[52]  Michael Burkhardt,et al.  Release of silver nanoparticles from outdoor facades. , 2010, Environmental pollution.

[53]  Flemming R Cassee,et al.  Exposure, Health and Ecological Effects Review of Engineered Nanoscale Cerium and Cerium Oxide Associated with its Use as a Fuel Additive , 2011, Critical reviews in toxicology.

[54]  Benjamin Gilbert,et al.  Use of a rapid cytotoxicity screening approach to engineer a safer zinc oxide nanoparticle through iron doping. , 2010, ACS nano.

[55]  S. Levin Ecosystems and the Biosphere as Complex Adaptive Systems , 1998, Ecosystems.

[56]  Hilary A. Godwin,et al.  Genome-wide bacterial toxicity screening uncovers the mechanisms of toxicity of a cationic polystyrene nanomaterial. , 2012, Environmental science & technology.

[57]  S. Pokhrel,et al.  Metal oxide nanomaterials in seawater: linking physicochemical characteristics with biological response in sea urchin development. , 2011, Journal of hazardous materials.