| Literature DB >> 23649538 |
Tian Xia1, Raymond F Hamilton, James C Bonner, Edward D Crandall, Alison Elder, Farnoosh Fazlollahi, Teri A Girtsman, Kwang Kim, Somenath Mitra, Susana A Ntim, Galya Orr, Mani Tagmount, Alexia J Taylor, Donatello Telesca, Ana Tolic, Christopher D Vulpe, Andrea J Walker, Xiang Wang, Frank A Witzmann, Nianqiang Wu, Yumei Xie, Jeffery I Zink, Andre Nel, Andrij Holian.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Differences in interlaboratory research protocols contribute to the conflicting data in the literature regarding engineered nanomaterial (ENM) bioactivity.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2013 PMID: 23649538 PMCID: PMC3672931 DOI: 10.1289/ehp.1306561
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Environ Health Perspect ISSN: 0091-6765 Impact factor: 9.031
Figure 1SEM images of ENMs: (A) TiO2-P25, (B) TiO2-NB, (C) TiO2-A, (D) ZnO, (E) O-MWCNT, (F) P-MWCNT, and (G) F-MWCNT.
Physicochemical characterization of TiO2 and ZnO ENMs.
| Quality | Technique | TiO2-P25 | TiO2-A | TiO2-NBs | ZnO |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Size (nm) | TEM | ~ 24 | ~ 28 | L:7000; W:200; T:10 | ~ 20 |
| Size in H2O (intensity-based) (nm ± SD) | DLS | 209 ± 8 (PdI 0.065) | 292 ± 70 | 2,897 ± 117 | 215 ± 15 (PdI 0.033) |
| Phase and structure | XRD | 81% anatase and 19% rutile | 100% anatase | 100% anatase | 100% zincite |
| Shape/morphology | TEM | Spheroid | Spherical | Belt | Spheroid |
| Surface area (m2/g) | BET | 53 | 173 | 18 | 26 |
| Zeta potential in H2O at pH 6.0 (mV ± SD) | Zetasizer | –34.4 ± 1.6 | –30.7 ± 0.8 | –30.3 ± 2.8 | –28.2 ± 0.5 |
| Elemental analysis (weight percent) | ICP-MS | 98.6 | NA | NA | 99.3 |
| Abbreviations: L, length; NA, not available; PdI, polydispersity index; T, thickness; W, width; XRD, X-ray defraction. | |||||
Physicochemical characterization of MWCNTs.
| Quality | Technique | O-MWCNT | P-MWCNT | F-MWCNT |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Size (nm) | TEM | D: 20–30; L: 5,000–10,000 | D: 20–30; L: 5,000–10,000 | D: 20–30; L: 5,000–10,000 |
| Size in H2O (intensity-based) (nm ± SD) | DLS | 324 ± 33 | 858 ± 58 | 234 ± 24 |
| Shape/morphology | TEM | Nanotube | Nanotube | Nanotube |
| Surface area (m2/g) | BET | 180 | 513 | 26 |
| Zeta potential in H2O at pH 6.0 (mV ± SD) | Zetasizer | –12.1 ± 0.3 | –11.8 ± 1.1 | –48.4 ± 1.7 |
| Elemental analysis (weight percent) | ICP-MS | 4.5% Ni, 0.8% Fe | 1.8% Ni, 0.1% Fe | 0.2% S |
| Abbreviations: D, diameter; Fe, iron; L, length; Ni, nickel, S, sulfur. | ||||
Figure 2Phase I/II comparisons for RLE-6TN and THP-1 cells using MTS assay data. (A) Percent viable RLE-6TN cells relative to no-particle control for each individual laboratory in phase I. (B) The ENM distorted OD readings in the MTS assay: with the ENM in the culture well (left); with the media supernatant removed and replaced in wells without particle interference (right); OD, optical density. (C) Percent viable RLE-6TN cells relative to no-particle control for each individual laboratory in phase II. (D,E) Percent viable cells relative to no-particle control for THP-1 phase I conditions (D) and for THP-1 phase II conditions (E). (F) Changes in error of the mean (left) and measure in error (right) from phase I to phase II trials for MTS assay data. Data are expressed as mean ± SE. *p < 0.05 compared with other particles at the same concentration and/or the “no-particle” control.
Figure 3Phase I/II comparisons for RLE-6TN and THP-1 cells using LDH assay data. (A,B) Percent LDH release in RLE-6TN cells relative to total cell lysis (100% cell death) for each individual laboratory in phase I (A) and in phase II (B). (C,D) Percent LDH release relative to total lysis for THP-1 phase I conditions (C) and for THP-1 phase II conditions (D). (E) Changes in error of the mean (left) and measure in error (right) from phase I to phase II trials for LDH assay data. Data are expressed as mean ± SE. *p < 0.05 compared with other particles at the same concentration and/or the “no-particle” control.
Figure 4Phase I/II comparisons for THP-1 cells using IL-1β assay data. (A) Percent IL-1β release from THP-1 cells for each individual laboratory in phase I. (B) THP-1 cell differentiation technique altered cell morphology: THP-1 cells pretreated with 1.62 µM PMA for 24 hr formed clumps (left), whereas cells pretreated with vitamin D3 overnight and then treated with 5 nM PMA were evenly dispersed (right). (C) IL-1β release from THP-1 cells for each individual laboratory in phase II. (D,E) Summary IL-1β release for phase I conditions (D) and for phase II conditions (E). (F) Changes in error of the mean (left) and measure in error (right) from phase I to phase II trials for IL-1β assay data. Data are expressed as mean ± SE. *p < 0.05 compared with other particles at the same concentration and/or the “no-particle” control. #p < 0.001 for dose response (each laboratory’s data analyzed independently).