Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 252

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Ultrafine particles: mechanisms of lung injury

Donaldson, K., Stone, V., Gilmour, P. S., Brown, D. M., MacNee, W.·2000·Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences

Abstract

Many ultrafine particles comprised classically of low–toxicity, low–solubility materials such as carbon black and titanium dioxide have been found to have greater toxicity than larger, respirable particles made of the same material. The basis of the increased toxicity of the ultrafine form is not well understood and a programme of research has been carried out in Edinburgh on the toxicology of ultrafines aimed at understanding the mechanism. We used fine and ultrafine carbon black, TiO2 and latex and showed that there was an approximately 10–fold increase in inflammation with the same mass of ultrafine compared with fine particles. Using latex particles in three sizes — 64, 202 and 535 nm — revealed that the smallest particles (64 nm) were profoundly inflammogenic but that the 202 and 535 nm particles had much less activity, suggesting that the cut–off for ultrafine toxicity lies somewhere between 64 and 202 nm. Increased oxidative activity of the ultrafine particle surface was shown using the fluorescent molecule dichlorofluorescein confirming that oxidative stress is a likely process by which the ultrafines have their effects. However, studies with transition–metal chelators and soluble extracts showed that the oxidative stress of ultrafine carbon black is not necessarily due to transition metals. Changes in intracellular Ca2+ levels in macrophage–like cells after ultrafine particle exposure suggested one way by which ultrafines might have their pro–inflammogenic effects.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1098/rsta.2000.0681

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

No references could be resolved yet.

Research works printed but not linked: 9

  1. 10.1002/(SICI)1096-9896(199910)189:2<258::AID-PATH410>3.0.CO;2-E · DOI
  2. 10.1038/31960 · DOI · Paper page
  3. 10.1016/S0021-8502(97)00464-3 · DOI · Paper page
  4. 10.1136/thx.51.12.1216 · DOI · Paper page
  5. MacNee W. & Donaldson K. 1999 Particulate air pollution: injurious and protective mechanisms. In Air pollution and health (ed. S. T. Holgate J. M. Samet H. S. Koren & R. L. Maynard) pp. 653-672. San Diego: Academic Press. · DOI
  6. 10.1016/S0021-8502(96)00495-8 · DOI
  7. Schins R. P. F. McAlinden A. MacNee W. Jimenez L. A. Ross J. A. Guy K. Faux S. & Donaldson K. 2000 Persistent depletion of I κ B α and interleukin-8 expression in human pulmonary epithelial cells exposed to quartz. Toxicol. Appl. Pharmacol. (In the press.) · DOI
  8. 10.1016/S0887-2333(98)00050-2 · DOI · Paper page
  9. 10.1034/j.1399-3003.2000.15b13.x · DOI · Paper page

Cited by

See all 252

Metadata

Authors
Donaldson, K., Stone, V., Gilmour, P. S., Brown, D. M., & MacNee, W.
Venue
Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences
Published
2000-10-15
Volume
358
Issue
1775
Pages
2741-2749
ISSN
  • 1364-503X (ISSN-L)
  • 1471-2962
OpenAlex
W2001426024
Cited by
252
References
0
FWCI
3.91
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Ultrafine particles: mechanisms of lung injury. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1098/rsta.2000.0681
The paper
Donaldson, K., Stone, V., Gilmour, P. S., Brown, D. M., & MacNee, W. (2000). Ultrafine particles: mechanisms of lung injury. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsta.2000.0681

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.