, Volume 17, Issue 5, pp 344–361 | Cite as

Nanoparticle analysis and characterization methodologies in environmental risk assessment of engineered nanoparticles

  • Martin Hassellöv
  • James W. Readman
  • James F. Ranville
  • Karen Tiede


Environmental risk assessments of engineered nanoparticles require thorough characterization of nanoparticles and their aggregates. Furthermore, quantitative analytical methods are required to determine environmental concentrations and enable both effect and exposure assessments. Many methods still need optimization and development, especially for new types of nanoparticles in water, but extensive experience can be gained from the fields of environmental chemistry of natural nanomaterials and from fundamental colloid chemistry. This review briefly describes most methods that are being exploited in nanoecotoxicology for analysis and characterization of nanomaterials. Methodological aspects are discussed in relation to the fields of nanometrology, particle size analysis and analytical chemistry. Differences in both the type of size measures (length, radius, aspect ratio, etc.), and the type of average or distributions afforded by the specific measures are compared. The strengths of single particle methods, such as electron microscopy and atomic force microscopy, with respect to imaging, shape determinations and application to particle process studies are discussed, together with their limitations in terms of counting statistics and sample preparation. Methods based on the measurement of particle populations are discussed in terms of their quantitative analyses, but the necessity of knowing their limitations in size range and concentration range is also considered. The advantage of combining complementary methods is highlighted.


Nanoparticles Nanoaggregates Nanometrology Analytical chemistry Particle size analysis 



Hassellöv thanks the Swedish Environmental Research Council FORMAS and University of Gothenburg Nanoparticle platform for financial support. J. Readman acknowledges partial support of his contribution through the UK Natural Environment Research Council Environmental Nanoscience Initiative (Grant Reference Number: NE/E014321/1). Ranville acknowledges partial support through EPA STAR Grant RD-83332401-0


  1. Aitken RJ, Chaudhry MQ, Boxall ABA, Hull M (2006) Manufacture and use of nanomaterials: current status in the UK and global trends. Occup Med 56:300–306CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Aitken RJ, Hankin SM, Tran CL, Donaldson K, Stone V, Cumpson P, Johnstone J, Chaudhry Q, Cash S (2007) REFNANO: reference materials for engineered nanoparticle toxicology and metrology. DEFRA, UK.
  3. Andrievsky GV, Klochkov VK, Bordyuh AB, Dovbeshko GI (2002) Comparative analysis of two aqueous-colloidal solutions of C-60 fullerene with help of FTIR reflectance and UV–vis spectroscopy. Chem Phys Lett 364:8–17CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Aryal S, Bahadur KCR, Bhattard N, Kim CK, Kim HY (2006) Study of electrolyte induced aggregation of gold nanoparticles capped by amino acids. J Colloid Interface Sci 299:191–197CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bailey RE, Smith AM, Nie S (2004) Quantum dots in biology and medicine. Physica E 25:1–12CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Balnois E, Wilkinson KJ (2002) Sample preparation techniques for the observation of environmental biopolymers by atomic force microscopy. Colloids Surf Physicochem Eng Aspects 207:229–242CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Balnois E, Papastavrou G, Wilkinson KJ (2007) Force microscopy and force measurements of environmental colloids. In: Wilkinson KJ, Lead JR (eds) Environmental colloids and particles: behaviour, structure and characterization. IUPAC series on analytical and physical chemistry of environmental systems. John Wiley and Sons, Chichester, pp 405–468Google Scholar
  8. Banfield JF, Navrotsky A (eds) (2001) Nanoparticles and the environment. Reviews in Mineralogy & Geochemistry, vol 44. The Mineralogy Society of America, Washington, DC, p 349Google Scholar
  9. Barth HG, Boyes BE (1992) Size exclusion chromatography. Anal Chem 64:428R–442RCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Barth HG, Flippen RB (1995) Particle size analysis. Anal Chem 67:257R–272RCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Becker L, Bada JL, Winans RE, Hunt JE, Bunch TE, French BM (1994) Fullerenes in the 1.85-billion-year-old Sudbury impact structure. Science 265:642–645CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Bogner A, Thollet G, Basset D, Jouneau PH, Gauthier C (2005) Wet STEM: a new development in environmental SEM for imaging nano-objects included in a liquid phase. Ultramicroscopy 104:290–301CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Breil R, Fries T, Garnaes J, Haycocks J, Huser D, Joergensen J, Kautek W, Koenders L, Kofod N, Koops KR, Korntner R, Lindner B, Mirande W, Neubauer A, Peltonen J, Picotto GB, Pisani M, Rothe H, Sahre M, Stedman M, Wilkening G (2002) Intercomparison of scanning probe microscopes. Precis Eng-J Int Soc Precis Eng Nanotechnol 26:296–305Google Scholar
  14. Brunauer S, Emmet PH, Teller E (1938) Adsoprtion of gases in multimolecular layers. J Am Chem Soc 60:309–319CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Buffle J, Perret J, Newman J (1992) The use of filtration and ultrafiltration for size fractionation of aquatic particles, colloids and macromolecules. In: Buffle J, van Leeuwen HP (eds) Environmental particles I. Lewis, Chelsea, pp 171–230Google Scholar
  16. Colvin VL (2003) The potential environmental impact of engineered nanomaterials. Nat Biotechnol 21:1166–1170CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Crane M, Handy RD (2007) An assessment of regulatory testing strategies and methods for characterizing the ecotoxicological hazards of nanomaterials, Report for Defra, London, UK. Available at:
  18. Doucet FJ, Lead JR, Maguire L, Achterberg EP, Millward GE (2005) Visualisation of natural aquatic colloids and particles—a comparison of conventional high vacuum and environmental scanning electron microscopy. J Environ Monit 7:115–121CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Duesberg GS, Burghard M, Muster J, Philipp G, Roth S (1998) Separation of carbon nanotubes by size exclusion chromatography. Chem Commun 3:435–436CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Ebdon L, Foulkes M, Sutton K (1997) Slurry nebulization in plasmas. J Anal Atom Spectrom 12:213–229CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. EPA (2007) Nanotechnology white paper, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC.
  22. Federici G, Shaw BJ, Handy RD (2007) Toxicity of titanium dioxide nanoparticles to rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss): gill injury, oxidative stress, and other physiological effects. Aquat Toxicol 84:415–430CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Filella M (2007) Colloidal properties of submicron particles in natural waters. In: Wilkinson KJ, Lead JR (eds) Environmental colloids and particles: behaviour, structure and characterization. IUPAC series on analytical and physical chemistry of environmental systems. John Wiley and Sons, Chichester, pp 17–93Google Scholar
  24. Filella M, Zhang J, Newman ME, Buffle J (1997) Analytical applications of photon correlation spectroscopy for size distribution measurements of natural colloidal suspensions. Colloids Surf A 120:27–46CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Finsy R (1994) Particle sizing by quasi-elastic light-scattering. Adv Colloid Interface Sci 52:79–143CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Fortner JD, Lyon DY, Sayes CM, Boyd AM, Falkner JC, Hotze EM, Alemany LB, Tao YJ, Guo W, Ausman KD, Colvin VL, Hughes JB (2005) C60 in water: nanocrystal formation and microbial response. Environ Sci Technol 39:4307–4316CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 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
  28. Gee GW, Bauder JW (1986) Particle size analysis, methods of soil analysis. Part 1. Physical and mineralogical methods. Agronomy monograph no. 9, 2nd edn. SSSA, Madison, Wisconsin, pp 383–411Google Scholar
  29. Giddings JC (1993) Field-flow fractionation: analysis of macromolecular, colloidal, and particulate matter. Science 260:1456–1465CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Gimbert LJ, Haygarth PM, Beckett R, Worsfold PJ (2005) Comparison of centrifugation and filtration techniques for the size fractionation of colloidal material in soil suspensions using sedimentation field-flow fractionation. Environ Sci Technol 39:1731–1735CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Gimbert LJ, Haygarth PM, Beckett R, Worsfold PJ (2006) The influence of sample preparation on observed particle size distributions for contrasting soil suspensions using flow field-flow fractionation. Environ Chem 3:184–191CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Guo L, Wen L-S, Tang D, Santschi PH (2000) Re-examination of cross-flow ultrafiltration for sampling marine colloids: evidence from molecular probes. Mar Chem 69:75–90CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Guzman KAD, Finnegan MP, Banfield JF (2006) Influence of surface potential on aggregation and transport of titania nanoparticles. Environ Sci Technol 40:7688–7693CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Hall GEM (1998) Relative contamination levels observed in different types of bottles used to collect water samples. Explorer 101:1–7Google Scholar
  35. Handy RD, von der Kammer F, Lead JR, Hassellöv M, Owen R, Crane M (2008) The ecotoxicology and chemistry of manufactured nanoparticles. Ecotoxicology 17:287–314CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Hansen SF, Larsen BH, Olsen SI, Baun A (2007) Categorization framework to aid hazard identification of nanomaterials. Nanotoxicology 1:243–250CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Hassellöv M, Lyven B, Haraldsson C, Sirinawin W (1999) Determination of continuous size and trace element distribution of colloidal material in natural water by on-line coupling of flow field-flow fractionation with ICPMS. Anal Chem 71:3497–3502CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Hassellöv M, Lyven B, Bengtsson H, Jansen R, Turner DR, Beckett R (2001) Particle size distributions of clay-rich sediments and pure clay minerals: a comparison of grain size analysis with sedimentation field-flow fractionation. Aquat Geochem 7:155–171CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Hassellöv M, von der Kammer F, Beckett R (2007) Characterisation of aquatic colloids and macromolecules by field-flow fractionation. In: Wilkinson KJ, Lead JR (eds) Environmental colloids and particles: behaviour, structure and characterization. John Wiley and Sons, Chichester, pp 223–276Google Scholar
  40. Hochella MF, Madden AS (2005) Earth’s nano-compartment for toxic metals. Elements 1:199–203CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Holt MS, Fox K, Griebach E, Johnsen S, Kinnunen J, Lecloux A, Murray-Smith R, Peterson DR, Schröder R, Silvani M, ten Berge WFJ, Toy RJ, Feijtel TCM (2000) Monitoring, modelling and environmental exposure assessment of industrial chemicals in the aquatic environment. Chemosphere 41:1799–1808CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Hunter KA, Liss PS (1979) The surface charge of suspended particles in estuarine and coastal water. Nature 282:823–825CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Hyung H, Fortner JD, Hughes JB, Kim JH (2007) Natural organic matter stabilizes carbon nanotubes in the aqueous phase. Environ Sci Technol 41:179–184CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Isaacson CW, Usenko CY, Tanguay RL, Field JA (2007) Quantification of fullerenes by LC/ESI-MS and its application to in vivo toxicity assays. Anal Chem 79:9091–9097CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Jackson BP, Ranville JF, Bertsch PM, Sowder A (2005) Characterization of colloidal and humic-bound Ni and U in the “dissolved” fraction of contaminated sediment extracts. Environ Sci Technol 39:2478–2485CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Jiang L, Gao L, Sun J (2003) Production of aqueous colloidal dispersions of carbon nanotubes. J Colloid Interface Sci 260:89–94CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Kim JI, Walther C (2007) Laser induced breakdown detection (LIBD). In: Wilkinson KJ, Lead JR (eds) Environmental colloids and particles: behaviour, structure and characterization. IUPAC series on analytical and physical chemistry of environmental systems. John Wiley and Sons, Chichester, pp 555–612Google Scholar
  48. Larsson J, Gustafsson O, Ingri J (2002) Evaluation and optimization of two complementary cross-flow ultrafiltration systems toward isolation of coastal surface water colloids. Environ Sci Technol 36:2236–2241CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Lead JR, Wilkinson KJ (2006) Aquatic colloids and nanoparticles: current knowledge and future trends. Environ Chem 3:159–171CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Lead JR, Wilkinson KJ, Balnois E, Cutak BJ, Larive CK, Assemi S, Beckett R (2000a) Diffusion coefficients and polydispersities of the Suwannee River fulvic acid: comparison of fluorescence correlation spectroscopy, pulsed-field gradient nuclear magnetic resonance, and flow field-flow fractionation. Environ Sci Technol 34:3508–3513CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Lead JR, Wilkinson KJ, Starchev K, Canonica S, Buffle J (2000b) Determination of diffusion coefficients of humic substances by fluorescence correlation spectroscopy: role of solution conditions. Environ Sci Technol 34:1365–1369CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Lead JR, Muirhead D, Gibson CT (2005) Characterization of freshwater natural aquatic colloids by atomic force microscopy (AFM). Environ Sci Technol 39:6930–6936CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Ledin A, Karlsson S, Duker A, Allard B (1994) Measurements in situ of concentration and size distribution of colloidal matter in deep groundwaters by photon-correlation spectroscopy. Water Res 28:1539–1545CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Link S, El-Sayed MA (1999) Spectral properties and relaxation dynamics of surface plasmon electronic oscillations in gold and silver nanodots and nanorods. J Phys Chem B 103:8410–8426CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Liu R, Lead JR (2006) Partial validation of cross flow ultrafiltration by atomic force microscopy. Anal Chem 78:8105–8112CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Madden AS, Hochella MF (2005) A test of geochemical reactivity as a function of mineral size: manganese oxidation promoted by hematite nanoparticles. Geochim Cosmochim Acta 69:389–398CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Mavrocordatos D, Pronk W, Boller M (2004) Analysis of environmental particles by atomic force microscopy, scanning and transmission electron microscopy. Water Sci Technol 50:9–18Google Scholar
  58. Mavrocordatos D, Perret D, Leppard GG (2007) Strategies and advances in the characterization of environmental colloids by electron microscopy. In: Wilkinson KJ, Lead JR (eds) Environmental colloids and particles: behaviour, structure and characterization. IUPAC series on analytical and physical chemistry of environmental systems. John Wiley and Sons, Chichester, pp 345–404Google Scholar
  59. Maynard AD, Aitken RJ, Butz T, Colvin V, Donaldson K, Oberdörster G, Philbert MA, Ryan J, Seaton A, Stone V, Tinkle SS, Tran L, Walker NJ and Warheit DB (2006) Safe handling of nanotechnology. Nature 444:267–269Google Scholar
  60. Morrison MA, Benoit G (2001) Filtration artifacts caused by overloading membrane filters. Environ Sci Technol 35:3774–3779CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Murr LE, Esquivel EV, Bang JJ, de la Rosa G, Gardea-Torresdey JL (2004) Chemistry and nanoparticulate compositions of a 10,000 year-old ice core melt water. Water Res 38:4282–4296CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Nowack B, Bucheli TD (2007) Occurrence, behavior and effects of nanoparticles in the environment. Environ Pollut 150:5–22CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Pal S, Tak YK, Song JM (2007) Does the antibacterial activity of silver nanoparticles depend on the shape of the nanoparticle? A study of the gram-negative bacterium Escherichia coli. Appl Environ Microbiol 73:1712–1720CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Perminova IV, Frimmel FH, Kudryavtsev AV, Kulikova NA, Abbt-Braun G, Hesse S, Petrosyan VS (2003) Molecular weight characteristics of humic substances from different environments as determined by size exclusion chromatography and their statistical evaluation. Environ Sci Technol 37:2477–2485CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Ranville JF, Chittleborough DJ, Doss F, Harris T, Morrison R, Beckett R (1999) Development of sedimentation field-flow fractionation-inductively coupled plasma-mass spectrometry for the characterization of environmental colloids. Anal Chim Acta 381:315–329CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Roco MC (2005) International perspective on government nanotechnology funding in 2005. J Nanopart Res 7:707–712CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Santos MC, Nobrega JA (2006) Slurry nebulization in plasmas for analysis of inorganic materials. Appl Spectroscop Rev 41:427–448CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. SCENIHR (2005) Opinion on the appropriateness of existing methodologies to assess the potential risks associated with engineered and adventitious products of nanotechnology. Scientific Committee on Emerging and Newly Identified Health Risks, European Commission.
  69. Schimpf M, Caldwell K, Giddings JC (eds) (2000) Field-flow fractionation handbook. John Wiley & Sons Inc., New York, p 616Google Scholar
  70. Schurtenberger P, Newman ME (1993) Characterization of biological and environmental particles using static and dynamic light scattering. In: Buffle J, van Leeuwen HP (eds) Environmental particles. Lewis Publishers, Boca Raton, Florida, pp 37–115Google Scholar
  71. Smith CJ, Shaw BJ, Handy RD (2007) Toxicity of single walled carbon nanotubes to rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss): respiratory toxicity, organ pathologies, and other physiological effects. Aquat Toxicol 82:94–109CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Suzuki Y, Kelly SD, Kemner KM, Banfield JF (2002) Radionuclide contamination—nanometre-size products of uranium bioreduction. Nature 419:134–134CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Taylor R (2006) Addition reactions of fullerenes. C R Chimie 9:982–1000Google Scholar
  74. Taylor R, Parsons JP, Avent AG, Rannard SP, Dennis TJ, Hare JP, Kroto HW and Walton DRM (1991) Degradation of C60 by light. Nature 351Google Scholar
  75. Thiberge S, Nechushtan A, Sprinzak D, Gileadi O, Behar V, Zik O, Chowers Y, Michaeli S, Schlessinger J, Moses E (2004) Scanning electron microscopy of cells and tissues under fully hydrated conditions. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 101:3346–3351CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Treubig JM, Brown PR (2002) Analysis of C60 and C70 fullerenes using high-performance liquid chromatography–Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy. J Chromatogr A 960:135–142CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Viguie JR, Sukmanowski J, Nolting B, Royer FX (2007) Study of agglomeration of alumina nanoparticles by atomic force microscopy (AFM) and photon correlation spectroscopy (PCS). Colloids Surf Physicochem Eng Aspects 302:269–275CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Vogl J, Heumann KG (1997) Determination of heavy metal complexes with humic substances by HPLC/ICP-MS coupling using on-line isotope dilution technique. Fresenius J Anal Chem 359:438–441CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. von der Kammer F (2005) Characterization of environmental colloids applying field-flow fractionation—multi detection analysis with emphasis on light scattering techniques. Hamburg University of Technology, Hamburg, p 254Google Scholar
  80. von der Kammer F, Baborowski M, Friese K (2005a) Application of HPLC fluorescence detector as a nephelometric turbidity detector following field-flow fractionation to analyse size distributions of environmental colloids. J Chromatogr A 1100:81–89CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. von der Kammer F, Baborowski M, Friese K (2005b) Field-flow fractionation coupled to multi-angle laser light scattering detectors: applicability and analytical benefits for the analysis of environmental colloids. Anal Chim Acta 552:166–174CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. Waychunas GA, Kim CS, Banfield JF (2005) Nanoparticulate iron oxide minerals in soils and sediments: unique properties and contaminant scavenging mechanisms. J Nanopart Res 7:409–433CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. Wigginton NS, Haus KL, Hochella MF (2007) Aquatic environmental nanoparticles. J Environ Monit 9:1306–1316CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. Williams A, Varela E, Meehan E, Tribe K (2002) Characterisation of nanoparticulate systems by hydrodynamic chromatography. Int J Pharm 242:295–299CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. Wyatt PJ (1998) Submicrometer particle sizing by multiangle light scattering following fractionation. J Colloid Interface Sci 197:9–20CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. Yu WW, Qu L, Guo W, Peng X (2003) Experimental determination of the extinction coefficient of CdTe, CdSe, and CdS nanocrystals. Chem Mater 15:2854–2860CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Martin Hassellöv
    • 1
  • James W. Readman
    • 2
  • James F. Ranville
    • 3
  • Karen Tiede
    • 4
    • 5
  1. 1.Department of ChemistryUniversity of GothenburgGothenburgSweden
  2. 2.Plymouth Marine LaboratoryPlymouthUK
  3. 3.Department of Chemistry & GeochemistryColorado School of MinesGoldenUSA
  4. 4.Central Science LaboratoryYorkUK
  5. 5.Environment DepartmentUniversity of YorkYorkUK

Personalised recommendations