Nanoscale reference materials for environmental, health and safety measurements: needs, gaps and opportunities

References

• Adler AF, Leong KW. 2010. Emerging links between surface nanotechnology and endocytosis: impact on nonviral gene delivery. Nano Today 5:553–569.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Aitken RJ, Hankin SM, Tran CL, Donaldson K, Stone V, Cumpson P, et al. 2008. A multidisciplinary approach to the identification of reference materials for engineered nanoparticle toxicology. Nanotoxicology 2:71–78.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• ASTM (American Society for Testing Materials) International. 2006. E2456-06: standard terminology relating to nanotechnology. West Conshohocken, PA.
   Google Scholar
• Balbus JM, Maynard AD, Colvin VL, Castranova V, Daston GP, Denison RA, et al. Kulinowski, et al. 2007. Meeting report: hazard assessment for nanoparticles-report from an interdisciplinary workshop. Environ Health Perspect 115:1654–1659.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boczkowski J, Hoet P. 2010. What's new in nanotoxicology? Implications for public health from a brief review of the 2008 literature. Nanotoxicology 4:1–14.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bouwmeester H, Lynch I, Marvin HJP, Dawson KA, Berges M, Braguer D, et al. 2011. Minimal analytical characterization of engineered nanomaterials needed for hazard assessment in biological materials. Nanotoxicology 5:1–11.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boverhof DR, David RM. 2010. Nanomaterial characterization: Considerations and needs for hazard assessment and safety evaluation. Anal Bioanal Chem 396:953–961.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Braun A, Franks K, Kestens V, Roebben G, Lamberty A, Linsinger A. 2011. Certification of equivalent spherical diameters of silica nanoparticles in water, certified reference material, ERM®-FD100. EUR report 24620.
   Google Scholar
• Bucher J, Masten S, Moudgil B, Powers K, Roberts S, Walker N. 2004. Developing experimental approaches for the evaluation of toxicological interactions of nanoscale materials. Final workshop report November 3-4, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL. Available at http://ntp.niehs.nih.gov/files/NanoToxWorkshop.pdf. Accessed on 26 April 2012.
   Google Scholar
• Card JW, Magnuson BA. 2009. Proposed minimum characterization parameters for food studies on food and food-related nanomaterials. J Food Sci 74:vi–vii.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Clift MJD, Dobson K, Hunt G, Gehr P, Rothen-Rutishauser B. 2010. NanoImpactNet Nomenclature, V.2. Available at http://www.nanoimpactnet.eu/index.php?page=nomenclature. [Accessed on 26 April 2012].
   Google Scholar
• Crane M, Handy RD, Garrod J, Owen R. 2008. Ecotoxicity test methods and environmental hazard assessment for engineered nanoparticles. Ecotoxicology 17:421–437.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dawson KA, Anguissola S, Lynch I. 2012. The need for in situ characterisation in nanosafety assessment: funded transnational access via the QNano research infrastructure. Nanotoxicology; Epub ahead of print.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dhawan A, Sharma V, Parmar D. 2009. Nanomaterials: a challenge for toxicologists. Nanotoxicology 3:1–9.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• EFSA (European Food Safety Authority). 2009. Scientific opinion: the potential risks arising from nanoscience and nanotechnologies on food and feed safety. EFSA J 958:1–39.
   Google Scholar
• Fubini B, Ghiazza M, Fenoglio I. 2010. Physico-chemical features of engineered nanoparticles relevant to their toxicity. Nanotoxicology 4:347–363.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Glover RD, Miller JM, Hutchison JE. 2011. Generation of metal nanoparticles from silver and copper objects: nanoparticle dynamics on surfaces and potential sources of nanoparticles in the environment. ACS Nano 5:8950–8957.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gonzalez L, Lison D, Kirsch-Volders M. 2008. Genotoxicity of engineered nanomaterials: a critical review. Nanotoxicology 2:252–273.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hackley VA, Fritts M, Kelly JF, Patri AK, Rawle AF. 2009. Enabling standards for nanomaterial characterization: Summary of the 2008 NIST workshop. In INFOSIM: Informative Bulletin of the InterAmerican Metrology System – Organization of American States, 24–29 August.
   Google Scholar
• Handy RD, Owen R, Valsami-Jones E. 2008a. The ecotoxicology of nanoparticles and nanomaterials: Current status, knowledge gaps, challenges, and future needs. Ecotoxicology 17:315–325.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Handy RD, Shaw BJ. 2007. Toxic effects of nanoparticles and nanomaterials: implications for public health, risk assessment and the public perception of nanotechnology. Health Risk Soc 9:125–144.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Handy RD, von der Kammer F, Lead JR, Hassellöv M, Owen R, Crane M. 2008b. The ecotoxicology and chemistry of manufactured nanoparticles. Ecotoxicology 17:287–314.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hankin S, Boraschi D, Duschl A, Lehr C-M, Lichtenbeld H. 2011. Towards nanotechnology regulation—Publish the unpublishable. Nano Today 6:228–231.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hansen SF, Larsen BH, Olsen SI, Baun A. 2007. Categorization framework to aid hazard identification of nanomaterials. Nanotoxicology 1:243–253.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hassellöv M, Readman JW, Ranville JF, Tiede K. 2008. Nanoparticle analysis and characterization methodologies in environmental risk assessment of engineered nanoparticles. Ecotoxicology 17:344–361.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• ICON (International Council on Nanotechnology). 2007. NanoEHS research needs assessment: Towards nanomaterial classes. Workshop 1 Report. Available at http://cohesion.rice.edu/centersandinst/icon/emplibrary/icon_rna_report_full2.pdf. [Accessed on 26 April 2012].
   Google Scholar
• ICON (International Council on Nanotechnology). 2008. Towards predicting nano-biointeractions: an international assessment of nanotechnology environment, health and safety research needs. Houston, TX: Rice University. May, No. 4.
   Google Scholar
• ISO (International Organization for Standardization). 2010b. TS 10801: nanotechnologies — generation of metal nanoparticles for inhalation toxicity testing using evaporation/condensation method. Geneva, Switzerland: ASTM International.
   Google Scholar
• ISO (International Organization for Standardization). 1992. Amendment 1, 2008). Guide 30: revision of definitions for reference material and certified reference material. Geneva, Switzerland.
   Google Scholar
• ISO (International Organization for Standardization). 2000. IS 14887: sample preparation — dispersing procedures for powders in liquids. Geneva, Switzerland.
   Google Scholar
• ISO (International Organization for Standardization). 2008. TS 27687: nanotechnologies — terminology and definitions for nano-objects - nanoparticle, nanofibre and nanoplate. Geneva, Switzerland.
   Google Scholar
• ISO (International Organization for Standardization). 2009. Guide 34: general requirements for the competence of reference material producers. Genvea, Switzerland.
   Google Scholar
• ISO (International Organization for Standardization). 2010a. TS 80004-1: nanotechnologies — vocabulary — Part 1: Core terms. Geneva, Switzerland.
   Google Scholar
• Klaine SJ, Alvarez PJ, Batley GE, Fernandes TF, Handy RD, Lyon DY, et al. 2008. Nanomaterials in the environment: behavior, fate, bioavailability, and effects. Environ Toxicol Chem 27:1825–1851.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kroll A, Pillukat MH, Hahn D, Schnekenburger J. 2009. Current in vitro methods in nanoparticle risk assessment: limitations and challenges. Eur J Pharm Biopharm 72:370–377.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kumar A, Dhawan A, Shanker R. 2011. The need for novel approaches in ecotoxicology of engineered nanomaterials. J Biomedical Nanotech 7:79–80.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Latham AH, Wilson MJ, Schiffer P, Williams ME. 2006. TEM-induced evolution in amorphous Fe Oxide nanoparticles. J Am Chem Soc 128:12632–12633.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• LeBouf RF, Stefaniak AB, Chen BT, Frazer DG, Virji MA. 2011. Measurement of airborne nanoparticle surface area using a filter-based gas adsorption method following inhalation toxicology experiments. Nanotoxicology 5:687–699.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Linsinger TPJ, Roebben G, Solans C, Ramsch R. 2011. Reference materials for measuring the size of nanoparticles. Trends Analyt Chem 30:1827.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lundqvist M, Stigler J, Elia G, Lynch I, Cedervall T, Dawson KA. 2008. Nanoparticle size and surface properties determine the protein corona with possible implications for biological impacts. Proc Natl Acad Sci 105:14265–14270.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lynch I, Bouwmeester H, Marvin H, Casey A, Chambers G, Berges M, et al. 2009. First approaches to standard protocols and reference materials for the assessment of potential hazards associated with nanomaterials. NanoImpactNet. Available at http://www.nanoimpactnet.eu/index.php?page=reports-and-publications-2. [Accessed on 26 April 2012].
   Google Scholar
• McNeil S. 2011. Challenges for nanoparticle characterization. Methods Mol Biol 697:9–15.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Murashov V, Howard J. 2008. The US must help set international standards for nanotechnology. Nat Nanotech 3:635–636.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Naha PC, Casey A, Tenuta T, Lynch I, Dawson KA, Byrne HJ, et al. 2009. Preparation, characterization of NIPAM and NIPAM/BAM copolymer nanoparticles and their acute toxicity testing using an aquatic test battery. Aquat Toxicol 92:146–154.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• NANO Risk Framework. 2007. Available at http://www.nanoriskframework.com/. [Accessed on 26 April 2012].
   Google Scholar
• NIST (National Institute of Standards and Technology). 2007. Material standards for environmental health and safety for engineered nanoscale materials. Poster DL, Small JA, Postek MT. Available at http://www.nist.gov/mml/upload/EHS_Instrumentation_lores.pdf. [Accessed on 26 April 2012].
   Google Scholar
• NIST (National Institute of Standards and Technology). 2008. Workshop on enabling standards for nanomaterial characterization. Gaithersburg, MD. Available at http://www.cenam.mx/nwsn/archivos/nano2/HACKLEY_TriNational_Feb%202009.pdf. [Accessed on 26 April 2012].
   Google Scholar
• Oberdörster G, Maynard A, Donaldson K, Castranova V, Fitzpatrick J, Ausman K, et al. 2005. Principles for characterizing the potential human health effects from exposure to nanomaterials: Elements of a screening strategy. Part Fibre Toxicol 2:8.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Oberdörster G. 2002. Toxicokinetics and effects of fibrous and nonfibrous particles. Inhal Toxicol 14:29–56.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• OECD (Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development). 2010. Series on the safety of manufactured nanomaterials. Report 27: List of manufactured nanomaterials and list of endpoints for phase one of the sponsorship programme for the testing of manufactured nanomaterials: Revision (December).
   Google Scholar
• Park B, Martin P, Harris C, Guest R, Whittingham A, Jenkinson P, et al. 2007. Initial in vitro screening approach to investigate the potential human health and environmental hazards of envirox™ – a nanoparticulate cerium oxide diesel fuel additive. Part Fibre Toxicol 4:12.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Postek MT, Vladar A. 2011. Modeling for accurate dimensional scanning electron microscope metrology: Then and now. Scanning 33:111–125.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Postek MT, Vladar AE, Jones S, Keery WJ. 1993. Interlaboratory study on the lithographically produced scanning electron microscope magnification standard prototype. NIST J Res 98:447–467.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Powers KW, Brown SC, Krishna VB, Wasdo SC, Moudgil BM, Roberts SM. 2006. Research strategies for safety evaluation of nanomaterials. Part VI. Characterization of nanoscale particles for toxicological evaluation. Toxicol Sci 90:296–303.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Reuther R. 2011. The NanoSustain and NanoValid projects – Two new EU FP7 research initiatives to assess the unique physical-chemical and toxicological properties of engineered nanomaterials. J Biomed Nanotechnol 7:8–10.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Riviere G. 2009. European and international standardization progress in the field of engineered nanoparticles. Inhal Toxicol 21:2–7.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Roebben G, Emons H, Reiners G. 2011a. Nanoscale reference materials. In: Murashov V, Howard J, editors. Nanostructure science and technology. New York: Springer. pp 53–75.
   Google Scholar
• Roebben G, Ramirez-Garcia S, Hackley VA, Roesslein M, Klaessig F, Kestens V, et al. 2011b. Interlaboratory comparison of size and surface charge measurements on nanoparticles prior to biological impact assessment. J Nanopart Res 13:2675–2687.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sayes CM, Warheit DB. 2009. Characterization of nanomaterials for toxicity assessment. WIRES Nanomed Nanobiotechnol 1:660–670.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• SCENIHR (Scientific Committee on Emerging and Newly-Identified Health Risks). 2007. The appropriateness of the risk assessment methodology in accordance with the technical guidance documents for new and existing substances for assessing the risks of nanomaterials. June 21-22
   Google Scholar
• SCENIHR (Scientific Committee on Emerging and Newly-Identified Health Risks). 2009. Risk assessment of products of nanotechnologies. January 19
   Google Scholar
• SCENIHR (Scientific Committee on Emerging and Newly-Identified Health Risks). 2010. Scientific basis for the definition of the term “nanomaterial”. July 6
   Google Scholar
• Schulte P, Geraci C, Zumwalde R, Hoover M, Kuempel E. 2008. Occupational risk management of engineered nanomaterials. J Occup Environ Hyg 5:239–249.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Šimon P, Joner E. 2008. Conceivable interactions of biopersistent nanoparticles with food matrix and living systems following from their physicochemical properties. J Food Nutrition Res 47:51–59.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Singh N, Manshian B, Jenkins GJS, Griffiths SM, Williams PM, Maffeis TGG, et al. 2009. NanoGenotoxicology: The DNA damaging potential of engineered nanomaterials. Biomaterials 30:3891–3914.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stone V, Nowack B, Baun A, van den Brink N, von der Kammer F, Dusinka M, et al. 2010. Nanomaterials for environmental studies: Classification, reference material issues, and strategies for physico-chemical characterization. Sci Total Environ 408:1745–1754.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Taurozzi JS, Hackley VA, Wiesner MR. 2012. A standardised approach for the dispersion of titanium dioxide nanoparticles in biological media. Nanotoxicology Early On-Line; doi:10.3109/17435390.2012.665506.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• The Royal Society & The Royal Academy of Engineering. 2004. Nanoscience and nanotechnologies: Opportunities and uncertainties. The Royal Society. Available at http://www.nanotec.org.uk/finalReport.htm. [Accessed on 26 April 2012].
   Google Scholar
• Tiede K, Boxall AB, Tear SP, Lewis J, David H, Hassellöv M. 2008. Detection and characterization of engineered nanoparticles in food and the environment. Food Addit Contam Part A Chem Anal Control Expo Risk Assess 25:795–821.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Walczyk D, Bombelli FB, Monopoli MP, Lynch I, Dawson KA. 2010. What the cell “sees” in bionanoscience. J Am Chem Soc 132:5761–5768.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wang CM, Baer DR, Amonette JE, Engelhard MH, Antony JJ, Qiang Y. 2007. Electron beam-induced thickening of the protective oxide layer around Fe nanoparticles. Ultramicroscopy 108:43–51.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Warheit DB, Borm PJ, Hennes C, Lademann J. 2007. Testing strategies to establish the safety of nanomaterials: Conclusions of an ECETOC workshop. Inhal Toxicol 19:631–643.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Warheit DB. 2008. How meaningful are the results of nanotoxicity studies in the absence of adequate material characterization? Toxicol Sci 101:183–185.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Weibel A, Bouchet R, Boulc'h F, Knauth P. 2005. The big problem of small particles: a comparison of methods for determination of particle size in nanocrystalline anatase powders. Chem Mater 17:2378–2385.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wilson R, Leschonski K, Alex W, Allen T, Koglin B, Scarlett B. 1980. Certification report on reference materials of defined particle size, Quartz BCR-66, -67, -68, 69, -70. EUR report 6825.
   Google Scholar
• Wörle-Knirsch JM, Pulskamp K, Krug HF. 2006. Oops they did it again! Carbon nanotubes hoax scientists in viability assays. Nano Lett 6:1261–1268.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zeisler R, Paul RL, Oflaz-Spatz R, Yu LL, Mann JL, Kelly WR, et al. 2011. Elemental analysis of a single-wall carbon nanotube candidate reference material. Anal Bioanal Chem 399:509–517.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zucker RM, Daniel KM. 2012. Microscopy imaging methods for the detection of silver and titanium nanoparticles within cells. Methods Mol Biol 906:483–496.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar