0
Article ? AI-assigned paper type based on the abstract. Classification may not be perfect — flag errors using the feedback button. Tier 2 ? Original research — experimental, observational, or case-control study. Direct primary evidence. Human Health Effects Nanoplastics Sign in to save

Materials, surfaces, and interfacial phenomena in nanoplastics toxicology research

Environmental Pollution 2021 84 citations ? Citation count from OpenAlex, updated daily. May differ slightly from the publisher's own count. Score: 55 ? 0–100 AI score estimating relevance to the microplastics field. Papers below 30 are filtered from public browse.
Leisha Martin, Nin Gan, Erica Wang, Mackenzie Merrill, Wei Xu

Summary

This review examines how the materials and surface properties of engineered nanoplastics used in toxicology research may not accurately represent real environmental nanoplastics. Researchers found that surfactants, fluorescent labels, and surface modifications commonly applied to lab-made nanoparticles can alter their toxicological profiles in unpredictable ways. The study calls for greater attention to how particle surface chemistry and preparation methods influence experimental outcomes in nanoplastics safety research.

Polymers

In response to the growing worldwide plastic pollution problem, the field of nanoplastics research is attempting to determine the risk of exposure to nanoparticles amidst their ever-increasing presence in the environment. Since little is known about the attributes of environmental nanoplastics (concentration, composition, morphology, and size) due to fundamental limitations in detection and quantification of smaller plastic particles, researchers often improvise by engineering nanoplastic particles with various surface modifications as models for laboratory toxicological testing. Polystyrene and other commercially available or easily synthesized polymer materials functionalized with surfactants or fluorophores are typically used for these studies. How surfactants, additives, fluorophores, the addition of surface functional groups for conjugation, or other changes to surface attributes alter toxicological profiles remains unclear. Additionally, the limited polymers used in laboratory models do not mimic the vast range of polymer types comprising environmental pollutants. Nanomaterials are tricky materials to investigate due to their high surface area, high surface energies, and their propensity to interact with molecules, proteins, and biological probes. These unique properties can often invalidate common laboratory assays. Extreme care must be taken to ensure that results are not artefactual. We have gathered zeta potential values for various polystyrene nanoparticles with different functionalization, in different solvents, from the reported literature. We also discuss the effects of surface engineering and solvent properties on interparticle interactions, agglomeration, particle-protein interactions, corona formation, nano-bio interfaces, and contemplate how these parameters might confound results. Various toxicological exemplars are critically reviewed, and the relevance and shortfalls of the most popular models used in nanoplastics toxicity studies published in the current literature are considered.

Sign in to start a discussion.

More Papers Like This

Article Tier 2

Microplastics and nanoplastics: Size, surface and dispersant – What causes the effect?

Researchers reviewed how the size, surface properties, and dispersants of micro- and nanoplastic particles influence their toxic effects. They found that smaller particles and certain surface modifications can significantly alter toxicity, and that dispersants used in laboratory studies may introduce confounding effects. The study emphasizes the need for standardized testing protocols that account for these variables to accurately assess plastic particle risks to human health.

Article Tier 2

From Pristine to Laboratory-weathered Micro- and Nanoplastics: Interaction with Environmental Contaminants and Biological Effects

This review contrasts pristine and laboratory-weathered micro- and nanoplastics in terms of surface chemistry, adsorption of co-contaminants, and biological effects, arguing that weathered particles better represent real-world exposures and often exhibit different or greater toxicity.

Article Tier 2

Suspension of micro- and nanoplastic test materials: liquid compatibility, (bio)surfactants, toxicity and environmental relevance

This study examined the compatibility of micro- and nanoplastic test materials with different liquid suspensions and surfactants, assessing toxicity and environmental relevance of these preparation methods for laboratory testing. The authors found that surfactant choice significantly affected both particle behavior and toxicity outcomes.

Article Tier 2

Potential Artifacts and Control Experiments in Toxicity Tests of Nanoplastic and Microplastic Particles

This review highlighted potential measurement artifacts and the importance of proper control experiments in toxicity studies of nanoplastics and microplastics. The study cautions that antimicrobials, surfactants, and other additives present in commercial plastic particle dispersions may account for observed toxic effects rather than the particles themselves, emphasizing the need for rigorous experimental design in microplastic toxicology research.

Article Tier 2

Towards more realistic reference microplastics and nanoplastics: preparation of polyethylene micro/nanoparticles with a biosurfactant

Polyethylene micro/nanoparticles stabilized with a biosurfactant were prepared as more realistic reference materials for ecotoxicity testing, better representing the surface properties and behavior of environmental microplastics compared to commercial standard materials. The study addresses a key methodological limitation in nanoplastic research by providing particles with environmentally relevant surface chemistry.

Share this paper