Analytical and Bioanalytical Chemistry

, Volume 396, Issue 2, pp 609–618 | Cite as

Toxicities of nano zinc oxide to five marine organisms: influences of aggregate size and ion solubility

  • Stella W. Y. Wong
  • Priscilla T. Y. Leung
  • A. B. Djurišić
  • Kenneth M. Y. LeungEmail author
Original Paper


Nano zinc oxide (nZnO) is increasingly used in sunscreen products, with high potential of being released directly into marine environments. This study primarily aimed to characterize the aggregate size and solubility of nZnO and bulk ZnO, and to assess their toxicities towards five selected marine organisms. Chemical characterization showed that nZnO formed larger aggregates in seawater than ZnO, while nZnO had a higher solubility in seawater (3.7 mg L−1) than that of ZnO (1.6 mg L−1). Acute tests were conducted using the marine diatoms Skeletonema costatum and Thalassiosia pseudonana, the crustaceans Tigriopus japonicus and Elasmopus rapax, and the medaka fish Oryzias melastigma. In general, nZnO was more toxic towards algae than ZnO, but relatively less toxic towards crustaceans and fish. The toxicity of nZnO could be mainly attributed to dissolved Zn2+ ions. Furthermore, molecular biomarkers including superoxide dismutase (SOD), metallothionein (MT) and heat shock protein 70 (HSP70) were employed to assess the sublethal toxicities of the test chemicals to O. melastigma. Although SOD and MT expressions were not significantly increased in nZnO-treated medaka compared to the controls, exposure to ZnO caused a significant up-regulation of SOD and MT. HSP70 was increased two to fourfold in all treatments indicating that there were probably other forms of stress in additional to oxidative stress such as cellular injury.


Zinc oxide Algae Crustacean Medaka Biomarker 



This research is partially funded by the Area of Excellence Scheme under the University Grants Committee of the Hong Kong Special Administration Region, China (Project No. AoE/P-04/2004) and supported by the Strategic Research Theme of Sustainable Environment and the Faculty of Science of the University of Hong Kong (HKU). Stella Wong thanks HKU to partially support her PhD studentship. We are grateful to Dr. X.Y. Li, Civil Engineering Department, HKU for allowing us to use the laser diffractometry instrument. We also thank the anonymous reviewer for his/her valuable comments on this manuscript, and thank Helen Leung and Cecily Law for their technical support throughout the project.


  1. 1.
    Seshadri R (2004) Oxide nanoparticles. In: Rao CNR, Müller A, Cheetham AK (eds) The chemistry of nanoparticles: synthesis, properties and applications. Wiley, Weinheim, pp 94–112Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Theodore L (2006) Nanotechnology: basic calculations for engineers and scientists. Wiley, HobokenGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Wang X, Lu J, Xu M, Xing B (2008) Sorption of pyrene by regular and nanoscaled metal oxide particles: influence of adsorbed organic matter. Environ Sci Technol 42:7267–7272CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Pikethly MJ (2004) Nanomaterials—the driving force. Mat Today 7:20–29CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Danovaro R, Bongiorni L, Corinaldesi C, Giovannelli D, Damiani E, Astolfi P, Greci L, Pusceddu A (2008) Sunscreens cause coral bleaching by promoting viral infections. Environ Health Perspect 116:441–447Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Franklin NM, Rogers NJ, Apte SC, Batley GE, Gadd GE, Casey PS (2007) Comparative toxicity of nanoparticulate ZnO, bulk ZnO, and ZnCl to a freshwater microalga (Pseudokirchneriella subcapitata): the importance of particle solubility. Environ Sci Technol 41:8484–8490CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Heinlaan M, Ivask A, Blinova I, Dubourguier H, Kahru A (2008) Toxicity of nanosized and bulk ZnO, CuO and TiO2 to bacteria Vibrio fischeri and crustaceans Daphnia magna and Thamnocephalus platyurus. Chemosphere 71:1308–1316CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Wang H, Wick RL, Xing B (2009) Toxicity of nanoparticulate and bulk ZnO, Al2O3 and TiO2 to the nematode Caenorhabditis elegans. Environ Pollut 157:1171–1177CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Zhu X, Zhu L, Duan Z, Qi R, Li Y, Lang Y (2008) Comparative toxicity of several metal oxide nanoparticles aqueous suspensions to zebrafish (Danio rerio) early developmental stage. J Environ Sci Heal A 43:278–284CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Aruoja V, Dubourguier H, Kasemets K, Kahru A (2009) Toxicity of nanoparticles of CuO, ZnO and TiO2 to microalgae Pseudokirchneriella subcaptitata. Sci Total Environ 407:1461–1468CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Handy RD, Owen R, Valsami-Jones E (2008) The ecotoxicology of nanoparticles and nanomaterials: current status, knowledge gaps, challenges, and future needs. Ecotoxicology 17:315–325CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kashiwada S (2006) Distribution of nanoparticles in the see-through medaka (Oryzias latipes). Environ Health Perspect 114:1697–1702Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Klaine SJ, Alvarez PJJ, Batley GE, Fernandes TF, Handy RD, Lyon DY, Mahendra S, McLaughlin MJ, Lead JR (2008) Nanomaterials in the environment: behavior, fate, bioavailability, and effects. Environ Toxicol Chem 27:1825–1851CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    French RA, Jacobson AR, Kim B, Isley SL, Lee Penn R, Baveye PC (2009) Influence of ionic strength, pH, and cation valence on aggregation kinetics of titanium dioxide nanoparticles. Environ Sci Technol 43:1354–1359CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Adams LK, Lyon DY, Alvarez PJJ (2006) Comparative eco-toxicity of nanoscale TiO2, SiO2, and ZnO water suspensions. Water Res 40:3527–3532CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Brunner TJ, Wick P, Manser P, Spohn P, Grass RN, Limbach LK, Bruinink A, Stark WJ (2006) In vitro cytotoxicity of oxide nanoparticles: comparison to asbestos, silica, and the effect of particle solubility. Environ Sci Technol 40:4374–4381CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Kahru A, Dubourguier HC, Blinova I, Ivask A, Kasemets K (2008) Biotests and biosensors for ecotoxicology of metal oxide nanoparticles: a minireview. Sensors 8:5153–5170CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Environmental Protection Department (EPD) (2006) Marine water quality in Hong Kong. Environment Protection Department, Hong KongGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Raisuddin S, Kwok KWH, Leung KMY, Schlenk D, Lee JS (2007) The copepod Tigriopus: a promising marine model organism for ecotoxicology and environmental genomics. Aquat Toxicol 83:161–173CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Wittbrodt J, Shima A, Schart M (2002) Medaka—a model organism from the far east. Nat Rev Genet 3:53–64CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Kong RYC, Giesy JP, Wu RSS, Chen EXH, Chiang MWL, Lim PL, Yuen BBH, Yip BWP, Mok HOL, Au DWT (2008) Development of a marine fish model for studying in vivo molecular responses in ecotoxicology. Aquat Toxicol 86:131–141CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Oberdörster E (2004) Manufactured nanomaterials (fullerenes, C60) induce oxidative stress in the brain of juvenile largemouth bass. Environ Health Perspect 112:1058–1062Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Xia T, Kovochich M, Brant J, Hotze M, Sempf J, Oberley T, Sioutas C, Yeh JI, Wiesner MR, Nel AE (2006) Comparison of the abilities of ambient and manufactured nanoparticles to induce cellular toxicity according to an oxidative stress paradigm. Nano Lett 6:1794–1807CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Yang H, Liu C, Yang D, Zhang H, Xi Z (2009) Comparative study of cytotoxicity, oxidative stress and genotoxicity induced by four typical nanomaterials: the role of particle size, shape and composition. J Appl Toxicol 29:69–78CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Andrews GK (2000) Regulation of metallothionein gene expression by oxidative stress and metal ions. Biochem Pharmacol 59:95–104CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Mosser DD, Caron AW, Bourget L, Denis-Larose C, Massie B (1997) Role of the human heat shock protein hsp70 in protection against stress-induced apoptosis. Mol Cell Biol 17:5317–5327Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Elmer P (1982) Analytical methods for atomic absorption spectrophotometry. Perkin Elmer, Norwalk, USAGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    ASTM (1993) Standard guide for conducting static toxicity tests with microalgae. American Society for Testing and Material (ASTM) E1218-04. Philadelphia, PennsylvaniaGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    OECD (1984) Guideline for testing of chemicals—freshwater alga and cyanobacteria, growth inhibition test. Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) Guidelines for Testing of Chemicals 201. Paris, FranceGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Hund-Rinke K, Simon M (2006) Ecotoxic effect of photocatalytic active nanoparticles (TiO2) on algae and daphnids. Environ Sci Pollut R 13:225–232CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Hacker SD, Steneck RS (1990) Habitat architecture and the abundance and body-size-dependent habitat selection of a phytal amphipod. Ecology 71:2269–2285CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    King CK, Gale SA, Hyne RV, Stauber JL, Simpson SL, Hickey CW (2005) Sensitivities of Australian and New Zealand amphipods to copper and zinc in waters and metal-spiked sediments. Chemosphere 63:1466–1476CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Wheeler MW, Park RM, Bailer AJ (2006) Comparing median lethal concentration values using confidence interval overlap or ratio tests. Environ Toxicol Chem 25:1441–1444CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Clarke KR, Warwick RM (2001) Change in marine communities: an approach to statistical analysis and interpretation. PRIMER-E, PlymouthGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Jiang W, Mashayekhi H, Xing B (2009) Bacterial toxicity comparison between nano- and micro-scaled oxide particles. Environ Pollut 157:1619–1625CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Grassian VH (2008) When size really matters: size-dependent properties and surface chemistry of metal oxide nanoparticles in gas and liquid phase environments. J Phys Chem C 112:180303–18313Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Bénézeth P, Palmer DA, Wesolowski DJ, Xiao C (2002) New measurements of the solubility of zinc oxide from 150 to 350 °C. J Solut Chem 31:947–973CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Dutra AJB, Paiva PRP, Tavares LM (2005) Alkaline leaching of zinc from electric arc furnace steel dust. Miner Eng 19:478–485CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Yebra DM, Kiil S, Weinell CE, Dam-Johansen K (2006) Dissolution rate measurements of sea water soluble pigments for antifouling paints: ZnO. Prog Org Coat 56:327–337CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Cao G (2004) Nanostructures & nanomaterials: synthesis, properties & applications. World Scientific, SingaporeGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Zhang L, Jiang Y, Ding Y, Povey M, York D (2007) Investigation into the antibacterial behavior of suspensions of ZnO nanoparticles (ZnO nanofluids). J Nano Res 9:479–489CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Neal AL (2008) What can be inferred from bacterium-nanoparticle interactions about the potential consequences of environmental exposure to nanoparticles? Ecotoxicol 17:362–371CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Gélabert A, Pokrovsky OS, Viers J, Schott J, Boudou A, Feurtet-Mazel A (2006) Interaction between zinc and freshwater and marine diatom species: surface complexation and Zn isotope fractionation. Geochim Cosmochim Ac 70:839–857CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Liufu S, Xiao H, Li Y (2004) Investigation of PEG adsorption on the surface of zinc oxide nanoparticles. Powder Technol 145:20–24CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Baun A, Hartmann NB, Grieger K, Kusk KO (2008) Ecotoxicity of engineered nanoparticles to aquatic invertebrates: a brief review and recommendations for future toxicity testing. Ecotoxicol 17:387–395CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Petersen EJ, Akkanen J, Kukkonen JVK, Weber WJ (2009) Biological uptake and depuration of carbon nanotubes by Daphnia magna. Environ Sci Technol 43:2969–2975CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Roberts AP, Mount AS, Seda B, Souther J, Qiao R, Lin S, Ke PC, Rao AM, Klaine S (2007) In vivo biomodification of lipid-coated carbon nanotubes by Daphnia magna. Environ Sci Technol 41:3025–3029CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Cruz-Rivera E, Hay ME (2000) Can quantity replace quality? Food choice, compensatory feeding, and fitness of marine mesograzers. Ecology 81:201–219Google Scholar
  49. 49.
    Mortimer M, Kasemets K, Heinlaan M, Kurvet I, Kahru A (2008) High throughput kinetic Vibrio fischeri bioluminescence inhibition assay for study of toxic effects of nanoparticles. Toxicol In Vitro 22:1412–1417CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Lin D, Xing B (2008) Root uptake and phytotoxicity of ZnO nanoparticles. Environ Sci Technol 42:5580–5585CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Muto N, Ren H, Hwang G, Tominaga S, Itoh N, Tanaka K (1999) Induction of two major isoforms of metallothionein in crucian carp (Carassius cuvieri) by air-pumping stress, dexamethasone, and metals. Comp Biochem Phys C 122:75–82CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Li H, Zhou Q, Wu Y, Fu J, Wang T, Jiang G (2009) Effects of waterborne nano-iron on medaka (Oryzias latipes): antioxidant enzymatic activitiy, lipid peroxidation and histopathology. Ecotoxicol Environ Safe 72:684–692CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Kiang JG, Tsokos GC (1998) Heat shock protein 70 kDa: molecular biology, biochemistry, and physiology. Pharmacol Therapeut 80:183–201CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Stella W. Y. Wong
    • 1
    • 2
  • Priscilla T. Y. Leung
    • 1
    • 2
  • A. B. Djurišić
    • 3
  • Kenneth M. Y. Leung
    • 1
    • 2
    Email author
  1. 1.The Swire Institute of Marine ScienceThe University of Hong KongHong KongChina
  2. 2.Division of Ecology & Biodiversity, School of Biological SciencesThe University of Hong KongHong KongChina
  3. 3.Department of PhysicsThe University of Hong KongHong KongChina

Personalised recommendations