Cited by 29Environmental Toxicology and EcotoxicologyNanoparticles: synthesis and applicationsMicroplastics and Plastic Pollution

Metallic, metal oxide, and metalloid nanoparticles toxic effects on freshwater microcrustaceans: An update and basis for the use of new test species

Gutierrez, María Florencia, Ale, Analía, Andrade, Victoria, Bacchetta, Carla, Rossi, Andrea, Cazenave, Jimena·2021·Water Environment Research

Abstract

In this article, we performed a literature review on the metallic, metal oxide, and metalloid nanoparticles (NP) effects on freshwater microcrustaceans, specifically focusing on (i) the main factors influencing the NP toxicity and (ii) their main ecotoxicological effects. Also, given that most studies are currently developed on the standard test species Daphnia magna Straus, we analyzed (iii) the potential differences in the biological responses between D. magna and other freshwater microcrustacean, and (iv) the ecological implications of considering only D. magna as surrogate of other microcrustaceans. We found that NP effects on microcrustaceans depended on their intrinsic properties as well as the exposure conditions. Among the general responses to different NP, we identified body burial, feeding inhibition, biochemical effects, metabolic changes, and reproductive and behavioral alterations. The differences in the biological responses between D. magna and other freshwater microcrustacean rely on the morphology (size and shape), ecological traits (feeding mechanisms, life cycles), and intrinsic sensitivities. Thus, we strongly recommend the use of microcrustaceans species with different morphological, physiological, and ecological characteristics in future ecotoxicity tests with NP to provide relevant information with regulation purposes regarding the discharge of NP into aquatic environments. Practitioner points: Nanoparticles effects depend on intrinsic and external factors. Nanoparticles affect the morphology, physiology, and behavior. Effects on Daphnia differ from other microcrustaceans. The use of more diverse test species is suggested.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/wer.1637

Cites

124 of 124 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Gutierrez, M. F., Ale, A., Andrade, V., Bacchetta, C., Rossi, A., & Cazenave, J.
Affiliations
  • Instituto Nacional de Limnología (CONICET‐UNL) Santa Fe Argentina
  • Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas (AR)
Venue
Water Environment Research
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2021-10-03
Volume
93
Issue
11
Pages
2505-2526
ISSN
  • 0043-1303 (ISSN-L)
  • 1061-4303
  • 1554-7531
OpenAlex
W3197636870
Cited by
29
References
124
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 10
FWCI
0.48
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Water Environment Research (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Health, Toxicology and Mutagenesis › Environmental Toxicology and Ecotoxicology
  • Physical Sciences › Materials Science › Materials Chemistry › Nanoparticles: synthesis and applications
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Pollution › Microplastics and Plastic Pollution
Keywords
metal nanoparticles, metal oxide nanoparticles, freshwater microcrustaceans, Daphnia magna, ecotoxicity, test species selection, surrogate species, feeding inhibition, reproductive effects, behavioral effects, exposure conditions
MeSH terms
Animals, Daphnia, Fresh Water, Oxides, Water Pollutants, Chemical, Nanoparticles, Metal Nanoparticles, Metalloids

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review