Cited by 208Environmental Toxicology and EcotoxicologyNanoparticles: synthesis and applicationsMicroplastics and Plastic Pollution

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 39 of the 39 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Biological Surface Coating and Molting Inhibition as Mechanisms of TiO2 Nanoparticle Toxicity in Daphnia magna

Open access

Abstract

The production and use of nanoparticles (NP) has steadily increased within the last decade; however, knowledge about risks of NP to human health and ecosystems is still scarce. Common knowledge concerning NP effects on freshwater organisms is largely limited to standard short-term (≤48 h) toxicity tests, which lack both NP fate characterization and an understanding of the mechanisms underlying toxicity. Employing slightly longer exposure times (72 to 96 h), we found that suspensions of nanosized (∼100 nm initial mean diameter) titanium dioxide (nTiO(2)) led to toxicity in Daphnia magna at nominal concentrations of 3.8 (72-h EC(50)) and 0.73 mg/L (96-h EC(50)). However, nTiO(2) disappeared quickly from the ISO-medium water phase, resulting in toxicity levels as low as 0.24 mg/L (96-h EC(50)) based on measured concentrations. Moreover, we showed that nTiO(2) (∼100 nm) is significantly more toxic than non-nanosized TiO(2) (∼200 nm) prepared from the same stock suspension. Most importantly, we hypothesized a mechanistic chain of events for nTiO(2) toxicity in D. magna that involves the coating of the organism surface with nTiO(2) combined with a molting disruption. Neonate D. magna (≤6 h) exposed to 2 mg/L nTiO(2) exhibited a "biological surface coating" that disappeared within 36 h, during which the first molting was successfully managed by 100% of the exposed organisms. Continued exposure up to 96 h led to a renewed formation of the surface coating and significantly reduced the molting rate to 10%, resulting in 90% mortality. Because coating of aquatic organisms by manmade NP might be ubiquitous in nature, this form of physical NP toxicity might result in widespread negative impacts on environmental health.

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 · 10.1371/journal.pone.0020112

Cites

39 of 39 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Figures

Figure 1 Mean immobilization (±SD; n = 6) of D. magna exposed to 2 mg/L TiO2 of different sizes. White bars: ∼200 nm TiO2; grey bars: ∼100 nm nTiO2.
Figure 1 Mean immobilization (±SD; n = 6) of D. magna exposed to 2 mg/L TiO2 of different sizes. White bars: ∼200 nm TiO2; grey bars: ∼100 nm nTiO2.CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 2 Mean immobilization (±SD; n = 6) of daphnids after 72 and 96 h of exposure to nominal concentrations of 0, 0.5, 1, 2, 4 and 8 mg nTiO2 (∼100 nm).
Figure 2 Mean immobilization (±SD; n = 6) of daphnids after 72 and 96 h of exposure to nominal concentrations of 0, 0.5, 1, 2, 4 and 8 mg nTiO2 (∼100 nm).CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 3 Dissipation of nTiO2 (∼100 nm) from the water phase. nTiO2 was measured as 47Ti, at initial concentrations of 0.5, 1, 2, 4, and 8 mg/L nTiO2 (ISO medium; means ± SD; n = 3).
Figure 3 Dissipation of nTiO2 (∼100 nm) from the water phase. nTiO2 was measured as 47Ti, at initial concentrations of 0.5, 1, 2, 4, and 8 mg/L nTiO2 (ISO medium; means ± SD; n = 3).CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 4 Development of biological surface coating in a 96-h toxicity test at 2 mg/L nTiO2 in ISO-medium. (A) 24 h, before 1st molting; (B) 25 h, about 1 h after 1st molting with arrow indicating renewed particle adhesions at filtration apparatus and the lower ventral gap; (C) 48 h; (D) 72 h; (E) 96 h; (F) ESEM-EDX picture of nTiO2 particle agglomerates colored in red on spine of D. magna following 48 h of exposure to, nTiO2 particles at 2 mg/L.
Figure 4 Development of biological surface coating in a 96-h toxicity test at 2 mg/L nTiO2 in ISO-medium. (A) 24 h, before 1st molting; (B) 25 h, about 1 h after 1st molting with arrow indicating renewed particle adhesions at filtration apparatus and the lower ventral gap; (C) 48 h; (D) 72 h; (E) 96 h; (F) ESEM-EDX picture of nTiO2 particle agglomerates colored in red on spine of D. magna following 48 h of exposure to, nTiO2 particles at 2 mg/L.CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 5 Molting success of juvenile D. magna (age ≤6 at 0 h) exposed to 2 mg/L nTiO2 (∼100 nm). Bars between 24 and 48 h on the left indicate the percentage of individuals passing the first molting, bars on the right, from 66 h onwards, represent those individuals passing the second molting. Black dots indicate the percentage of immobilized D. magna in the nTiO2 treatment.
Figure 5 Molting success of juvenile D. magna (age ≤6 at 0 h) exposed to 2 mg/L nTiO2 (∼100 nm). Bars between 24 and 48 h on the left indicate the percentage of individuals passing the first molting, bars on the right, from 66 h onwards, represent those individuals passing the second molting. Black dots indicate the percentage of immobilized D. magna in the nTiO2 treatment.CC BY · PubMed Central

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

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?

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

Show all 38 references

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. RD Handy, 2008, The ecotoxicology of nanoparticles and nanomaterials: current status, knowledge gaps, challenges, and future needs., Ecotoxicology, 17, 315, 10.1007/s10646-008-0206-0 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 208

Metadata

Authors
Dabrunz, A., Duester, L., Prasse, C., Seitz, F., Rosenfeldt, R., Schilde, C., Schaumann, G. E., & Schulz, R.
Affiliations
  • University of Koblenz and Landau (DE)
  • Technische Universität Braunschweig (DE)
Corresponding author
Schulz, Ralf
Venue
PLoS ONE
Published
2011-05-27
Volume
6
Issue
5
Pages
e20112
ISSN
1932-6203 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1971246481
Cited by
208
References
38
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 12 · 2021: 10 · 2020: 14 · 2019: 15 · 2018: 17 · 2017: 13 · 2016: 26 · 2015: 22 · 2014: 22 · 2013: 13 · 2012: 14
FWCI
12.45
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • PLoS ONE (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
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
titanium dioxide nanoparticles, nanoparticle toxicity, Daphnia magna, molting inhibition, particle size effects, freshwater zooplankton, ecotoxicology, long-term exposure
MeSH terms
Animals, Daphnia, Dose-Response Relationship, Drug, Particle Size, Suspensions, Time Factors, Titanium, Water, Molting, Nanoparticles

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