Biohazards of Nanomaterials

  • Priyanka MauryaEmail author
  • Samipta Singh
  • Rajashri R. Naik
  • Ashok K. Shakya
Part of the Engineering Materials book series (ENG.MAT.)


Nanoparticles (NPs) refer to materials that have a range of 1–100 nm in one or more dimension. These can be sourced from a variety of engineered, targeted materials and in naturally occurring forms. Many of which, have not been systematically evaluated for their hazardous nature. Extensive use of nanotechnology in daily products, as well as drug delivery systems, has lead to their accumulation and proved to be a biohazard. Some studies in the recent past have reported potential toxic effects of these NPs (Silver NPs, Cerium NPs which have proven ecotoxicological impact in the freshwater environment).


  1. Ajdary, M., et al. (2018). Health concerns of various nanoparticles: A review of their in vitro and in vivo toxicity. Nanomaterials, 8(9), 634.
  2. Alaraby, M., et al. (2015). Antioxidant and antigenotoxic properties of CeO2 NPs and cerium sulphate: Studies with Drosophila melanogaster as a promising in vivo model. Nanotoxicology, 9(6), 749–759.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. de Alteriis, E., et al. (2018). Genotoxicity of gold nanoparticles functionalized with indolicidin towards Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Journal of Environmental Sciences (China), 66, 138–145.
  4. Aravind, A., & Dhanya, S. (2016). In-silico design, synthesis and anti-proliferative evaluation of acetidino-quinazoline derivatives. International Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences Review and Research, 36(1), 249–255.Google Scholar
  5. Ávalos, A., et al. (2018). In vitro and in vivo genotoxicity assessment of gold nanoparticles of different sizes comet and SMART assays. Food and Chemical Toxicology, 120, 81–88.
  6. Bastos, V., et al. (2017). Coating independent cytotoxicity of citrate- and PEG-coated silver nanoparticles on a human hepatoma cell line. Journal of Environmental Sciences (China), 51, 191–201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bergami, E., et al. (2017). Long-term toxicity of surface-charged polystyrene nanoplastics to marine planktonic species Dunaliella tertiolecta and Artemia franciscana. Aquatic Toxicology, 189, 159–169.
  8. Bermejo-Nogales, A., Fernández-Cruz, M. L., & Navas, J. M. (2017). Fish cell lines as a tool for the ecotoxicity assessment and ranking of engineered nanomaterials. Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology, 90, 297–307.
  9. Bhattacharya, K., et al. (2017). Cytotoxicity screening and cytokine profiling of nineteen nanomaterials enables hazard ranking and grouping based on inflammogenic potential. Nanotoxicology, 11(6), 809–826.
  10. Bondarenko, O. M., et al. (2016). Multilaboratory evaluation of 15 bioassays for (eco) toxicity screening and hazard ranking of engineered nanomaterials: FP7 project NANOVALID. Nanotoxicology, 10(9), 1229–1242.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Carmona, E. R., García-Rodríguez, A., & Marcos, R. (2018). Genotoxicity of copper and nickel nanoparticles in somatic cells of Drosophila melanogaster. Journal of Toxicology, 2018.Google Scholar
  12. Colman, B. P., et al. (2014). Emerging contaminant or an old toxin in disguise? Silver nanoparticle impacts on ecosystems. Environmental Science and Technology, 48(9), 5229–5236.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Concu, R., et al. (2017). Probing the toxicity of nanoparticles: A unified in silico machine learning model based on perturbation theory. Nanotoxicology, 11(7), 891–906.
  14. Cowie, H., et al. (2015). Suitability of human and mammalian cells of different origin for the assessment of genotoxicity of metal and polymeric engineered nanoparticles. Nanotoxicology, 9(S1), 57–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Das, D., et al. (2017). Assessment of photocatalytic potentiality and determination of ecotoxicity (using plant model for better environmental applicability) of synthesized copper, copper oxide and copper-doped zinc oxide nanoparticles. PLoS ONE, 12(8).Google Scholar
  16. Demir, E., et al. (2015). Genotoxic and cell-transforming effects of titanium dioxide nanoparticles. Environmental Research, 136, 300–308.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Demir, E., & Castranova, V. (2016). Genotoxic effects of synthetic amorphous silica nanoparticles in the mouse lymphoma assay, Elsevier Ireland Ltd.
  18. Demir, E., Creus, A., & Marcos, R. (2014). Genotoxicity and DNA repair processes of zinc oxide nanoparticles. Journal of Toxicology and Environmental Health, Part A, 77(21), 1292–1303.
  19. Dhawan, A., & Sharma, V. (2010). Toxicity assessment of nanomaterials: Methods and challenges. Analytical and Bioanalytical Chemistry, 398(2), 589–605.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Doktorovova, S., et al. (2014). Comet assay reveals no genotoxicity risk of cationic solid lipid nanoparticles. Journal of Applied Toxicology, 34(4), 395–403.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Du, J., et al. (2018). The potential phototoxicity of nano-scale ZnO induced by visible light on freshwater ecosystems. Chemosphere, 208, 698–706.
  22. Elgeti, D., et al. (2018). Mucus and microbiota as emerging players in gut nanotoxicology: The example of dietary silver and titanium dioxide nanoparticles. Critical Reviews in Food Science and Nutrition, 58(6), 1023–1032.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Fontana, L., et al. (2015). The effects of palladium nanoparticles on the renal function of female Wistar rats. Nanotoxicology, 9(7), 843–851.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. García-Alonso, J., et al. (2014). Toxicity and accumulation of silver nanoparticles during development of the marine polychaete Platynereis dumerilii. Science of the Total Environment, 476–477, 688–695.
  25. Gebel, T., et al. (2014). Manufactured nanomaterials: Categorization and approaches to hazard assessment. Archives of Toxicology, 88(12), 2191–2211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Gupta, G. S., et al. (2016). Assessment of agglomeration, co-sedimentation and trophic transfer of titanium dioxide nanoparticles in a laboratory-scale predator-prey model system. Scientific Reports, 6, 1–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Han, X., et al. (2014). Monitoring the developmental impact of copper and silver nanoparticle exposure in Drosophila and their microbiomes. Science of the Total Environment, 487(1), 822–829.
  28. Handral, H. K., et al. (2016). Pluripotent stem cells: An in vitro model for nanotoxicity assessments. Journal of Applied Toxicology, 36(10), 1250–1258.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Hashimoto, M., & Imazato, S. (2015). Cytotoxic and genotoxic characterization of aluminum and silicon oxide nanoparticles in macrophages. Dental Materials, 31(5), 556–564.
  30. He, X., et al. (2015). Quantifying the total ionic release from nanoparticles after particle-cell contact. Environmental Pollution, 196, 194–200.
  31. Heinlaan, M., et al. (2016). Natural water as the test medium for Ag and CuO nanoparticle hazard evaluation: An interlaboratory case study. Environmental Pollution, 216, 689–699.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Holden, P. A., et al. (2014). Evaluation of exposure concentrations used in assessing manufactured nanomaterial environmental hazards: Are they relevant? Environmental Science and Technology, 48(18), 10541–10551.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Iavicoli, I., Fontana, L., & Nordberg, G. (2016). The effects of nanoparticles on the renal system. Critical Reviews in Toxicology, 46(6), 490–560.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Ibrahim, R. K., et al. (2016). Environmental application of nanotechnology: Air, soil, and water. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 23(14), 13754–13788.
  35. Iglesias, T., et al. (2017). In vitro evaluation of the genotoxicity of poly(anhydride) nanoparticles designed for oral drug delivery. International Journal of Pharmaceutics, 523(1), 418–426.
  36. Ivask, A., et al. (2014). Toxicity mechanisms in Escherichia coli vary for silver nanoparticles and differ from ionic silver. ACS Nano, 8(1), 374–386.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Juganson, K., et al. (2015). NanoE-Tox: New and in-depth database concerning ecotoxicity of nanomaterials. Beilstein Journal of Nanotechnology, 6(1), 1788–1804.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Katsnelson, B. A., et al. (2015). Is it possible to enhance the organism’s resistance to toxic effects of metallic nanoparticles? Toxicology, 337, 79–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Kermanizadeh, A., et al. (2015). Nanomaterial translocation-the biokinetics, tissue accumulation, toxicity and fate of materials in secondary organs-A review. Critical Reviews in Toxicology, 45(10), 837–872.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Kim, K. H., et al. (2015). Nanoparticle formation in a chemical storage room as a new incidental nanoaerosol source at a nanomaterial workplace. Journal of Hazardous Materials, 298, 36–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Kleandrova, V. V., et al. (2014). Computational tool for risk assessment of nanomaterials: Novel QSTR-perturbation model for simultaneous prediction of ecotoxicity and cytotoxicity of uncoated and coated nanoparticles under multiple experimental conditions. Environmental Science and Technology, 48(24), 14686–14694.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Kühnel, D., Krug, H. F., & Kokalj, A. J. (2018). Environmental impacts of engineered nanomaterials—Imbalances in the safety assessment of selected nanomaterials. Materials, 11(8), 1444.
  43. Kumar, A., & Dhawan, A. (2013). Genotoxic and carcinogenic potential of engineered nanoparticles: An update. Archives of Toxicology, 87(11), 1883–1900.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Kumar, A., et al. (2011a). Cellular uptake and mutagenic potential of metal oxide nanoparticles in bacterial cells. Chemosphere, 83(8), 1124–1132. Scholar
  45. Kumar, A., et al. (2011b). Engineered ZnO and TiO2 nanoparticles induce oxidative stress and DNA damage leading to reduced viability of Escherichia coli. Free Radical Biology and Medicine, 51(10), 1872–1881. Scholar
  46. Kumar, A., et al. (2015). Zinc oxide nanoparticles affect the expression of p53, Ras p21 and JNKs: An ex vivo/in vitro exposure study in respiratory disease patients. Mutagenesis, 30(2), 237–245.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Kuswandi, B. (2018). Nanobiosensors for Detection of Micropollutants (pp. 125–158). Springer.Google Scholar
  48. Kwon, J. Y., Kim, H. L., et al. (2014a). Undetactable levels of genotoxicity of SiO2 nanoparticles in in vitro and in vivo tests. International Journal of Nanomedicine, 9, 173–181.Google Scholar
  49. Kwon, J. Y., Koedrith, P., & Seo, Y. R. (2014b). Current investigations into the genotoxicity of zinc oxide and silica nanoparticles in mammalian models in vitro and in vivo: Carcinogenic/genotoxic potential, relevant mechanisms and biomarkers, artifacts, and limitations. International Journal of Nanomedicine, 9, 271–286.Google Scholar
  50. Laux, P., et al. (2018). Nanomaterials: Certain aspects of application, risk assessment and risk communication. Archives of Toxicology, 92(1), 121–141. Scholar
  51. Leso, V., & Iavicoli, I. (2018). Palladium nanoparticles: Toxicological effects and potential implications for occupational risk assessment. International Journal of Molecular Sciences, 19(2).Google Scholar
  52. Leso, V., et al. (2018). Palladium nanoparticle effects on endocrine reproductive system of female rats. Human and Experimental Toxicology, 37(10), 1069–1079. Scholar
  53. Magdolenova, Z., et al. (2014). Mechanisms of genotoxicity. A review of in vitro and in vivo studies with engineered nanoparticles. Nanotoxicology, 8(3), 233–278.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Martirosyan, A., Bazes, A., & Schneider, Y. J. (2014). In vitro toxicity assessment of silver nanoparticles in the presence of phenolic compounds-preventive agents against the harmful effect? Nanotoxicology, 8(5), 573–582.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Masrahi, A., VandeVoort, A. R., & Arai, Y. (2014). Effects of silver nanoparticle on soil-nitrification processes. Archives of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology, 66(4), 504–513.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Møller, P., & Jacobsen, N. R. (2017). Weight of evidence analysis for assessing the genotoxic potential of carbon nanotubes. Critical Reviews in Toxicology, 47(10), 867–884. Scholar
  57. Moon, J., et al. (2017). Multigenerational effects of gold nanoparticles in Caenorhabditis elegans: Continuous versus intermittent exposures. Environmental Pollution, 220, 46–52. Scholar
  58. Moretti, E., et al. (2013). In vitro effect of gold and silver nanoparticles on human spermatozoa. Andrologia, 45(6), 392–396.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Naasz, S., Altenburger, R., & Kühnel, D. (2018). Environmental mixtures of nanomaterials and chemicals: The Trojan-horse phenomenon and its relevance for ecotoxicity. Science of the Total Environment, 635, 1170–1181.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Nam, S. H., Kim, S. W., & An, Y. J. (2013). No evidence of the genotoxic potential of gold, silver, zinc oxide and titanium dioxide nanoparticles in the SOS chromotest. Journal of Applied Toxicology, 33(10), 1061–1069.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Nymark, P., et al. (2013). Genotoxicity of polyvinylpyrrolidone-coated silver nanoparticles in BEAS 2B cells. Toxicology, 313(1), 38–48. Scholar
  62. Oliver, A. L. S., et al. (2014). Does water chemistry affect the dietary uptake and toxicity of silver nanoparticles by the freshwater snail Lymnaea stagnalis? Environmental Pollution, 189, 87–91. Scholar
  63. Otero-González, L., et al. (2013). Toxicity of TiO2, ZrO2, Fe0, Fe2O3, and Mn2O3 nanoparticles to the yeast, Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Chemosphere, 93(6), 1201–1206.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Patel, P., et al. (2016). Cell cycle dependent cellular uptake of zinc oxide nanoparticles in human epidermal cells. Mutagenesis, 31(4), 481–490.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Pfuhler, S., et al. (2017). Weak silica nanomaterial-induced genotoxicity can be explained by indirect DNA damage as shown by the OGG1-modified comet assay and genomic analysis. Mutagenesis, 32(1), 5–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Qualhato, G., et al. (2017). Genotoxic and mutagenic assessment of iron oxide (maghemite-Γ-Fe2O3) nanoparticle in the guppy Poecilia reticulata. Chemosphere, 183, 305–314. Scholar
  67. Raj, A., Shah, P., & Agrawal, N. (2017). Sedentary behavior and altered metabolic activity by AgNPs ingestion in Drosophila melanogaster. Scientific Reports, 7(1), 1–10. Scholar
  68. Rocha, T. L., et al. (2018). Changes in metallothionein transcription levels in the mussel Mytilus galloprovincialis exposed to CdTe quantum dots. Ecotoxicology, 27(4), 402–410. Scholar
  69. Salehpour, S., et al. (2018). Biodegradation and ecotoxicological impact of cellulose nanocomposites in municipal solid waste composting. International Journal of Biological Macromolecules, 111, 264–270. Scholar
  70. Sario, S., Silva, A. M., & Gaivão, I. (2018). Titanium dioxide nanoparticles: Toxicity and genotoxicity in Drosophila melanogaster (SMART eye-spot test and comet assay in neuroblasts). Mutation Research/Genetic Toxicology and Environmental Mutagenesis, 831, 19–23. Scholar
  71. Schlich, K., et al. (2017). Ecotoxicity and fate of a silver nanomaterial in an outdoor lysimeter study. Ecotoxicology, 26(6), 738–751. Scholar
  72. Senapati, V. A., Jain, A. K., et al. (2015a). Chromium oxide nanoparticle-induced genotoxicity and p53-dependent apoptosis in human lung alveolar cells. Journal of Applied Toxicology, 35(10), 1179–1188.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Senapati, V. A., Kumar, A., et al. (2015b). ZnO nanoparticles induced inflammatory response and genotoxicity in human blood cells: A mechanistic approach. Food and Chemical Toxicology, 85, 61–70. Scholar
  74. Seo, J., et al. (2014). Effects of physiochemical properties of test media on nanoparticle toxicity to daphnia magna straus. Bulletin of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology, 93(3), 257–262.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Sharma, V., et al. (2012a). Induction of oxidative stress, DNA damage and apoptosis in mouse liver after sub-acute oral exposure to zinc oxide nanoparticles. Mutation Research/Genetic Toxicology and Environmental Mutagenesis, 745(1–2), 84–91. Scholar
  76. Sharma, V., Anderson, D., & Dhawan, A. (2012b). Zinc oxide nanoparticles induce oxidative DNA damage and ROS-triggered mitochondria mediated apoptosis in human liver cells (HepG2). Apoptosis, 17(8), 852–870.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Shukla, R. K., et al. (2011). ROS-mediated genotoxicity induced by titanium dioxide nanoparticles in human epidermal cells. Toxicology in Vitro, 25(1), 231–241. Scholar
  78. Shukla, R. K., et al. (2013). TiO2 nanoparticles induce oxidative DNA damage and apoptosis in human liver cells. Nanotoxicology, 7(1), 48–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Shukla, R. K., et al. (2014). Titanium dioxide nanoparticle-induced oxidative stress triggers DNA damage and hepatic injury in mice. Nanomedicine, 9(9), 1423–1434.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Singh, S. P., et al. (2016). Genotoxic effects of chromium oxide nanoparticles and microparticles in Wistar rats after 28 days of repeated oral exposure. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 23(4), 3914–3924. Scholar
  81. Stevenson, L. M., et al. (2017). Standardized toxicity testing may underestimate ecotoxicity: Environmentally relevant food rations increase the toxicity of silver nanoparticles to Daphnia. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, 36(11), 3008–3018.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. Sturm, R. (2016). A stochastic model of carbon nanotube deposition in the airways and alveoli of the human respiratory tract. Inhalation Toxicology, 28(2), 49–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. Tavares, A. M., et al. (2014). Genotoxicity evaluation of nanosized titanium dioxide, synthetic amorphous silica and multi-walled carbon nanotubes in human lymphocytes. Toxicology in Vitro, 28(1), 60–69. Scholar
  84. Taylor, A. A., & Walker, S. L. (2016). Effects of copper particles on a model septic system’s function and microbial community. Water Research, 91, 350–360. Scholar
  85. Valdiglesias, V., et al. (2013). Comparative study on effects of two different types of titanium dioxide nanoparticles on human neuronal cells. Food and Chemical Toxicology, 57, 352–361. Scholar
  86. Vecchio, G., et al. (2014). Lab-on-a-chip-based high-throughput screening of the genotoxicity of engineered nanomaterials. Small (Weinheim an der Bergstrasse, Germany), 10(13), 2721–2734.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. Waissi, G. C., et al. (2017). The chronic effects of fullereneC60-associated sediments in the midge Chironomus riparius—Responses in the first and the second generation. Environmental Pollution, 229, 423–430.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. Yang, X., et al. (2014). Silver nanoparticle behavior, uptake, and Toxicity in Caenorhabditis elegans: Effects of natural organic matter. Environmental Science & Technology, 48(6), 3486–3495. Scholar
  89. Van der Zande, M., et al. (2014). Sub-chronic toxicity study in rats orally exposed to nanostructured silica. Particle and Fibre Toxicology, 11(1), 1–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  90. Zou, X., Shi, J., & Zhang, H. (2014). Coexistence of silver and titanium dioxide nanoparticles: Enhancing or reducing environmental risks? Aquatic Toxicology, 154, 168–175. Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  • Priyanka Maurya
    • 1
    Email author
  • Samipta Singh
    • 1
  • Rajashri R. Naik
    • 2
  • Ashok K. Shakya
    • 2
  1. 1.Faculty of Pharmaceutical SciencesBabasaheb Bhimrao Ambedkar UniversityLucknowIndia
  2. 2.Department of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Faculty of PharmacyAl-Ahliyya Amman UniversityAmmanJordan

Personalised recommendations