Advertisement

Time-Dependent Toxicity Responses in Daphnia magna Exposed to CuO and ZnO Nanoparticles

  • Soyoun Kim
  • Palas Samanta
  • Jisu Yoo
  • Woo-Keun Kim
  • Jinho JungEmail author
Article

Abstract

Aggregation and dissolution of CuO and ZnO nanoparticles (NPs) increased with increasing exposure time (24, 48, and 72 h). Acute toxicity of CuO NPs to Daphnia magna also increased significantly with increasing exposure time (p < 0.05), whereas exposure time did not significantly affect acute toxicity of ZnO NPs. The dissolved Cu concentration of CuO NPs was much lower than the median effective concentration (EC50) value (44 μg L−1 at 72 h), implying that the increase in acute toxicity was caused by particles rather than by dissolved ions. However, the dissolved Zn concentration of ZnO NPs was higher than the EC50 value (600 μg L−1 at 72 h), suggesting this acute toxicity may be caused by dissolved ions. Moreover, CuO NPs induced greater lipid peroxidation than Cu ions did at an exposure time of 72 h, whereas converse results were observed for ZnO NPs.

Keywords

Acute toxicity Copper Daphnid Nanotoxicology Oxidative stress Zinc 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) Grant funded by the Korea government (MSIP) (No. NRF-2016R1A2B4016299), and by the Korean Ministry of Environment as “Development of integrated model for climate change impact and vulnerability assessment”.

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Adam N, Leroux F, Knapen D, Bals S, Blust R (2014a) The uptake of ZnO and CuO nanoparticles in the water-flea Daphnia magna under acute exposure scenarios. Environ Pollut 194:130–137Google Scholar
  2. Adam N, Schmitt C, Galceran J, Companys E, Vakurov A, Wallace R, Knapen D, Blust R (2014b) The chronic toxicity of ZnO nanoparticles and ZnCl2 to Daphnia magna and the use of different methods to assess nanoparticle aggregation and dissolution. Nanotoxicology 8:709–717Google Scholar
  3. Adam N, Vergauwen L, Blust R, Knapen Dries (2015a) Gene transcription patterns and energy reserves in Daphnia magna show no nanoparticle specific toxicity when exposed to ZnO and CuO nanoparticles. Environ Res 138:82–92Google Scholar
  4. Adam N, Leroux F, Knapen D, Bals S, Blust R (2015b) The uptake and elimination of ZnO and CuO nanoparticles in Daphnia magna under chronic exposure scenarios. Water Res 68:249–261Google Scholar
  5. Aruoja V, Dubourguier HC, Kasemets K, Kahru A (2009) Toxicity of nanoparticles of CuO, ZnO and TiO2 to microalgae Pseudokirchneriella subcapitata. Sci Total Environ 407:1461–1468CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bagwe RP, Hilliard LR, Tan W (2006) Surface modification of silica nanoparticles to reduce aggregation and nonspecific binding. Langmuir 22:4357–4362CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Barata C, Varo I, Navarro JC, Arun S, Porte C (2005) Changes in antioxidant enzyme activities, fatty acid composition and lipid peroxidation in Daphnia magna during the aging process. Comp Biochem Phys C 140:175–186Google Scholar
  8. Baun A, Hartman NB, Grieger K, Kusk KO (2008) Ecotoxicity of engineered nanoparticles to aquatic invertebrates: a brief review and recommendations for future toxicity testing. Ecotoxicology 17:387–395CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Blinova I, Ivask A, Heinlaan M, Mortimer M, Kahru A (2010) Ecotoxicity of nanoparticles of CuO and ZnO in natural water. Environ Pollut 158:41–47CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Bradford MM (1976) A rapid and sensitive method for the quantitation of microgram quantities of protein utilizing the principle of protein–dye binding. Ana Biochem 72:248–254CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Chang YN, Zhang M, Xia L Zhang J, Xing G (2012) The toxic effects and mechanisms of CuO and ZnO nanoparticles. Materials 5:2850–2871CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Chowdhuri A, Gupta V, Sreenivas K, Kumar R, Mozumdar S, Patanjali PK (2004) Response speed of SnO2-based H2S gas sensors with CuO nanoparticles. Appl Phys Lett 84:1180–1182CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. David CA, Galceran J, Rey-Castro C, Puy J, Companys E, Salvador J, Monne J, Wallace R, Vakourov A (2012) Dissolution kinetics and solubility of ZnO nanoparticles followed by AGNES. J Phys Chem C 116:11758–11767CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Franklin NM, Rogers NJ, Apte SC, Batley GE, Gadd GE, Casey PS (2007) Comparative toxicity of nanoparticulate ZnO, bulk ZnO, and ZnCl2 to a freshwater microalga (Pseudokirchneriella subcapitata): the importance of particle solubility. Environ Sci Technol 41:8484–8490CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Heinlaan M, Ivask A, Blinova I, Dubourguier HC, 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
  16. Heinlaan M, Kahru A, Kasemets K, Arbeille B, Prensier G, Dubourguier HC (2011) Changes in the Daphnia magna midgut upon ingestion of copper oxide nanoparticles: a transmission electron microscopy study. Water Res 45:179–190CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Hernández Battez A, Viesca JL, Gonzalez R, Blanco D, Asedegbega E, Osorio A (2010) Friction reduction properties of a CuO nanolubricant used as lubricant for a NiCrBSi coating. Wear 268:325–328CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Hotze EM, Phenrat T, Lowry GV (2010) Nanoparticle aggregation: challenges to understanding transport and reactivity in the environment. J Environ Qual 39:1909–1924CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Jo HJ, Choi JW, Lee SH, Hong SW (2012) Acute toxicity of Ag and CuO nanoparticle suspensions against Daphnia magna: the importance of their dissolved fraction varying with preparation methods. J Hazard Mater 227–228:301–308CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Kasemets K, Ivask A, Dubourguier HC, Kahru A (2009) Toxicity of nanoparticles of ZnO, CuO and TiO2 to yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Toxicol In Vitro 23:1116–1122CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Keller AA, Wang H, Zhou D, Lenihan HS, Cherr G, Cardinale BJ, Miller R, Ji Z (2010) Stability and aggregation of metal oxide nanoparticles in natural aqueous matrices. Environ Sci Technol 44:1962–1967CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Kennedy A, Hull M, Bednar AJ, Goss J, Gunter J, Bouldin J, Vikesland P, Steevens J (2010) Fractionating nanosilver: importance for determining toxicity to aquatic test organisms. Environ Sci Technol 44:9571–9577CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Klaper R, Crago S, Barr J, Arndt D, Setyowati K, Chen J (2009) Toxicity biomarker expression in daphnids exposed to manufactured nanoparticles: changes in toxicity with functionalization. Environ Pollut 157:1152–1156CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Li WM, Wang WX (2013) Distinct biokinetic behavior of ZnO nanoparticles in Daphnia magna quantified by synthesizing 65Zn tracer. Water Res 47:895–902CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Lin D, Tin X, Wu F, Xing B (2010) Fate and transport of engineered nanomaterials in the environment. J Environ Qual 39:1896–1908CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Ma H, Williams PL, Diamond SA (2013) Ecotoxicity of manufactured ZnO nanoparticles: a review. Environ Pollut 172:76–85CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Mwaanga P, Carraway ER, van den Hurk P (2014) The induction of biochemical changes in Daphnia magna by CuO and ZnO nanoparticles. Aquat Toxicol 150:201–209CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Nowack B, Bucheli TD (2007) Occurrence, behavior and effects of nanoparticles in the environment. Environ Pollut 150:5–22CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (2004) Daphnia sp. Acute immobilization test. OECD Guidelines for testing of chemicals No. 202, Paris, FranceGoogle Scholar
  30. Seo J, Kim S, Choi S, Kwon D, Yoon TH, Kim WK, Park JW, Jung J (2014) Effects of physiochemical properties of test media on nanoparticle toxicity to Daphnia magna Straus. Bull Environ Contam Toxicol 93:257–262CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. United States Environmental Protection Agency (2002) Methods for measuring the acute toxicity of effluents and receiving waters to freshwater and marine organisms. EPA/821/R-02/012, WashingtonGoogle Scholar
  32. Wiench K, Wohllenben W, Hisgen V, Radke K, Salinas E, Zok S, Landsiedel K (2009) Acute and chronic effects of nano- and non-nano-scale TiO2 and ZnO particles on mobility and reproduction of the freshwater invertebrate Daphnia magna. Chemosphere 76:1356–1365CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Xiao Y, Vijver MG, Chen G, Peijnenburg WJGM (2015) Toxicity and accumulation of Cu and ZnO nanoparticles in Daphnia magna. Environ Sci Technol 49:4657–4664CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Zhao J, Wang Z, Liu X, Xie X, Zhang K, Xing B (2011) Distribution of CuO nanoparticles in juvenile carp (Cyprinus carpio) and their potential toxicity. J Hazard Mater 197:304–310CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Zhao HZ, Lu GH, Xia J, Jin SG (2012) Toxicity of nanoscale CuO and ZnO to Daphnia magna. Chem Res Chin Univ 28:209–213Google Scholar
  36. Zhu X, Zhu L, Chen Y, Tia S (2009) Acute toxicities of six manufactured nanomaterials suspensions to Daphnia magna. J Nanopart Res 11:67–75CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Soyoun Kim
    • 1
  • Palas Samanta
    • 1
  • Jisu Yoo
    • 1
  • Woo-Keun Kim
    • 2
  • Jinho Jung
    • 1
  1. 1.Division of Environmental Science and Ecological EngineeringKorea UniversitySeoulRepublic of Korea
  2. 2.System Toxicology Research CenterKorea Institute of ToxicologyDaejeonRepublic of Korea

Personalised recommendations