Predicting environmental concentrations of nanomaterials for exposure assessment - a review

IF 4.7 3区 环境科学与生态学 Q2 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES
Arturo A. Keller , Yuanfang Zheng , Antonia Praetorius , Joris T.K. Quik , Bernd Nowack
{"title":"Predicting environmental concentrations of nanomaterials for exposure assessment - a review","authors":"Arturo A. Keller ,&nbsp;Yuanfang Zheng ,&nbsp;Antonia Praetorius ,&nbsp;Joris T.K. Quik ,&nbsp;Bernd Nowack","doi":"10.1016/j.impact.2024.100496","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p><span>There have been major advances in the science to predict the likely environmental concentrations of nanomaterials<span>, which is a key component of exposure and subsequent risk assessment. Considerable progress has been since the first Material Flow Analyses (MFAs) in 2008, which were based on very limited information, to more refined current tools that take into account engineered nanoparticle (ENP) size distribution, form, dynamic release, and better-informed release factors. These MFAs provide input for all </span></span>environmental fate<span><span><span> models (EFMs), that generate estimates of particle flows and concentrations in various environmental compartments. While MFA models provide valuable information on the magnitude of ENP release, they do not account for fate processes, such as homo- and heteroaggregation, transformations, dissolution, or corona formation. EFMs account for these processes in differing degrees. EFMs can be divided into multimedia compartment models (e.g., atmosphere, waterbodies and their sediments, soils in various landuses), of which there are currently a handful with varying degrees of complexity and process representation, and spatially-resolved watershed models which focus on the water and sediment compartments. Multimedia models have particular applications for considering predicted environmental concentrations (PECs) in particular regions, or for developing generic “fate factors” (i.e., overall persistence in a given compartment) for life-cycle assessment. Watershed models can track transport and eventual fate of emissions into a flowing river, from multiple sources along the waterway course, providing spatially and temporally resolved PECs. Both types of EFMs can be run with either continuous sources of emissions and environmental conditions, or with dynamic emissions (e.g., temporally varying for example as a new nanomaterial is introduced to the market, or with seasonal applications), to better understand the situations that may lead to peak PECs that are more likely to result in exceedance of a toxicological threshold. In addition, </span>bioaccumulation models have been developed to predict the internal concentrations that may accumulate in exposed organisms, based on the PECs from EFMs. The main challenge for MFA and EFMs is a full validation against observed data. To date there have been no field studies that can provide the kind of dataset(s) needed for a true validation of the PECs. While EFMs have been evaluated against a few observations in a small number of locations, with results that indicate they are in the right order of magnitude, there is a great need for field data. Another major challenge is the input data for the MFAs, which depend on market data to estimate the production of ENPs. The current information has major gaps and large uncertainties. There is also a lack of robust analytical techniques for quantifying ENP properties in complex matrices; machine learning may be able to fill this gap. Nevertheless, there has been major progress in the tools for generating PECs. With the emergence of nano- and </span>microplastics as a leading environmental concern, some EFMs have been adapted to these materials. However, caution is needed, since most nano- and microplastics are not engineered, therefore their characteristics are difficult to generalize, and there are new fate and transport processes to consider.</span></p></div>","PeriodicalId":18786,"journal":{"name":"NanoImpact","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"NanoImpact","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2452074824000065","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

There have been major advances in the science to predict the likely environmental concentrations of nanomaterials, which is a key component of exposure and subsequent risk assessment. Considerable progress has been since the first Material Flow Analyses (MFAs) in 2008, which were based on very limited information, to more refined current tools that take into account engineered nanoparticle (ENP) size distribution, form, dynamic release, and better-informed release factors. These MFAs provide input for all environmental fate models (EFMs), that generate estimates of particle flows and concentrations in various environmental compartments. While MFA models provide valuable information on the magnitude of ENP release, they do not account for fate processes, such as homo- and heteroaggregation, transformations, dissolution, or corona formation. EFMs account for these processes in differing degrees. EFMs can be divided into multimedia compartment models (e.g., atmosphere, waterbodies and their sediments, soils in various landuses), of which there are currently a handful with varying degrees of complexity and process representation, and spatially-resolved watershed models which focus on the water and sediment compartments. Multimedia models have particular applications for considering predicted environmental concentrations (PECs) in particular regions, or for developing generic “fate factors” (i.e., overall persistence in a given compartment) for life-cycle assessment. Watershed models can track transport and eventual fate of emissions into a flowing river, from multiple sources along the waterway course, providing spatially and temporally resolved PECs. Both types of EFMs can be run with either continuous sources of emissions and environmental conditions, or with dynamic emissions (e.g., temporally varying for example as a new nanomaterial is introduced to the market, or with seasonal applications), to better understand the situations that may lead to peak PECs that are more likely to result in exceedance of a toxicological threshold. In addition, bioaccumulation models have been developed to predict the internal concentrations that may accumulate in exposed organisms, based on the PECs from EFMs. The main challenge for MFA and EFMs is a full validation against observed data. To date there have been no field studies that can provide the kind of dataset(s) needed for a true validation of the PECs. While EFMs have been evaluated against a few observations in a small number of locations, with results that indicate they are in the right order of magnitude, there is a great need for field data. Another major challenge is the input data for the MFAs, which depend on market data to estimate the production of ENPs. The current information has major gaps and large uncertainties. There is also a lack of robust analytical techniques for quantifying ENP properties in complex matrices; machine learning may be able to fill this gap. Nevertheless, there has been major progress in the tools for generating PECs. With the emergence of nano- and microplastics as a leading environmental concern, some EFMs have been adapted to these materials. However, caution is needed, since most nano- and microplastics are not engineered, therefore their characteristics are difficult to generalize, and there are new fate and transport processes to consider.

预测环境中纳米材料的浓度以进行暴露评估--综述
预测纳米材料在环境中的可能浓度的科学研究取得了重大进展,这是暴露和后续风险评估的关键组成部分。自 2008 年首次基于非常有限的信息进行物质流分析 (MFA) 以来,已经取得了长足的进步,目前的工具更加精细,考虑到了工程纳米粒子 (ENP) 的尺寸分布、形态、动态释放和更明智的释放因素。这些 MFA 为所有环境归宿模型 (EFM) 提供了输入信息,这些模型可对不同环境区划中的质量流和浓度进行估算。虽然 MFA 模型提供了 ENPs 释放量的宝贵信息,但它们并不考虑最终过程,例如同聚和异聚、转化、溶解或电晕形成。EFM 在不同程度上考虑了这些过程。EFMs 可分为多媒体分区模型(如大气、水体及其沉积物、各种土地利用中的土壤)和侧重于水体和沉积物分区的流域模型。多媒体模型特别适用于考虑特定区域的预测环境浓度 (PEC),或为生命周期评估开发通用的 "归宿因子"(即在特定区域的总体持久性)。流域模型可以跟踪沿水道多源排放到流动河流中的排放物的迁移和最终归宿,提供空间和时间分辨率的预测环境浓度。这两种类型的 EFM 都可以在连续排放源和环境条件下运行,也可以在动态(例如,随着新纳米材料进入市场或季节性应用而发生时间变化)条件下运行,以便更好地了解可能导致 PECs 达到峰值的情况,这种情况更有可能导致毒理学阈值超标。此外,还开发了生物累积模型,以根据 EFM 的预测环境浓度来预测暴露生物体内可能累积的浓度。MFA 和 EFM 所面临的主要挑战是根据观测数据进行全面验证。迄今为止,还没有实地研究可以提供真正验证预测环境浓度所需的数据集。虽然已经根据少量地点的观测数据对 EFMs 进行了评估,结果表明它们的数量级是正确的,但仍亟需开展实地工作。另一个主要挑战是多边财务框架的输入数据,该框架依赖市场数据来估算 ENPs 的产量。目前的信息存在很大差距和不确定性。此外,还缺乏可靠的分析技术来量化复杂基质中的 ENP 特性;机器学习或许可以填补这一空白。不过,在生成 PECs 的工具方面已经取得了重大进展。随着纳米塑料和微塑料成为主要的环境问题,一些 EFM 已适用于这些材料。不过,由于大多数纳米和微塑料并非工程塑料,因此其特性很难一概而论,而且还需要考虑新的归宿和迁移过程,因此需要谨慎行事。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
NanoImpact
NanoImpact Social Sciences-Safety Research
CiteScore
11.00
自引率
6.10%
发文量
69
审稿时长
23 days
期刊介绍: NanoImpact is a multidisciplinary journal that focuses on nanosafety research and areas related to the impacts of manufactured nanomaterials on human and environmental systems and the behavior of nanomaterials in these systems.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信