4.8 Article

Physicochemical properties of functionalized carbon-based nanomaterials and their toxicity to fishes

期刊

CARBON
卷 104, 期 -, 页码 78-89

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.carbon.2016.03.041

关键词

-

资金

  1. NRC-Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC)-Business Development Bank of Canada Nanotechnology Initiative and Environment Canada [NNBPJ380151-08]
  2. Alberta Innovates Technology Futures (AITF) nanoWorks (CRA) [200900065]
  3. NSERC
  4. Queen Elizabeth II Graduate Scholarship
  5. NSERC Vanier Canada Graduate Scholarship
  6. AITF Scholarship
  7. Science Without Borders Undergraduate Scholarship

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Chemical functionalization to tailor surface properties of nanomaterials (NMs) is expected to broaden their scope of potential applications but may also be used to modify NM toxicity. We have examined the physicochemical properties of single-walled carbon nanotubes (SWCNTs) with varying degrees of carboxylic acid group functionalization, two types of lignin-wrapped SWCNTs, as well as nonfunctionalized SWCNTs. Zebrafish (Danio rerio) embryos were exposed to 1, 10, 50, 100 or 200 mg/L functionalized and nonfunctionalized SWCNTs for up to 72 h; measured endpoints included survival, hatching success, and alteration in gene expression. We have also characterized carboxylated cellulose nanocrystals (CNCs) and examined their effects both in vivo using zebrafish and in vitro using three channel catfish (Ictalurus punctatus) cell lines. While nonfunctionalized SWCNTs did not affect survival or hatch of embryos, carboxylic acid functionalized SWCNTs accelerated hatching and lignin-wrapped SWCNTs both decreased survival and delayed hatch at all time points tested. Carboxylated. CNC exposure decreased the viability of 1G8 and 28S.3 catfish cells. We suggest that surface functionality affects SWCNT characteristics and plays a key role in determining their toxicity. (C) 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

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

4.8
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