Characterization of physicochemical properties of nanomaterials and their immediate environments in high-throughput screening of nanomaterial biological activity

Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Nanomedicine and Nanobiotechnology

Volumn 5, Issue 5, 2013, Pages 430-448

  Wang, Amy ^a   Marinakos, Stella M ^b   Badireddy, Appala Raju ^b   Powers, Christina M ^c   Houck, Keith A ^a  

^a U S ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY   (United States)

^b DUKE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^c U S ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

BIOLOGICAL SAMPLES; CHARACTERIZATION TECHNIQUES; COMPUTATIONAL MODEL; COMPUTATIONAL TOOLS; HIGH-THROUGHPUT SCREENING; IMMEDIATE ENVIRONMENT; PHYSICO-CHEMICAL CHARACTERIZATION; PHYSICOCHEMICAL PROPERTY;

CHARACTERIZATION; COMPUTATIONAL METHODS; NANOSTRUCTURED MATERIALS; TOXICITY;

BIOACTIVITY;

CARBON NANOTUBE; COPPER NANOPARTICLE; GOLD NANOPARTICLE; LEAD; METAL NANOPARTICLE; NANOCAGE; NANOMATERIAL; NANOWIRE; REACTIVE NITROGEN SPECIES; SILVER NANOPARTICLE; TITANIUM DIOXIDE;

ARTICLE; BIOLOGICAL ACTIVITY; CHEMICAL COMPOSITION; CYTOTOXICITY; DEVELOPMENTAL TOXICITY; DISSOLUTION; ENVIRONMENTAL FACTOR; HIGH THROUGHPUT SCREENING; HUMAN; HUMIDITY; IONIC STRENGTH; NONHUMAN; PHYSICAL CHEMISTRY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REPRODUCTIVE TOXICITY; SOLUBILITY; STRUCTURE ACTIVITY RELATION; SURFACE CHARGE; TOXICITY TESTING; ANIMAL; BIOASSAY; BIOLOGY; CHEMISTRY; COMPUTER SIMULATION; METHODOLOGY; NANOMEDICINE; PARTICLE SIZE; SURFACE PROPERTY; PROCEDURES; TRENDS;

ANIMALS; BIOLOGICAL ASSAY; COMPUTATIONAL BIOLOGY; COMPUTER SIMULATION; HIGH-THROUGHPUT SCREENING ASSAYS; HUMANS; NANOMEDICINE; NANOSTRUCTURES; PARTICLE SIZE; PHYSICOCHEMICAL PHENOMENA; SURFACE PROPERTIES; TOXICITY TESTS;

EID: 84884821363     PISSN: 19395116     EISSN: 19390041     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/wnan.1229     Document Type: Article

References (114)

1. Nanowerk. Nanomaterial Database Search. Available at: http://www.nanowerk.com/phpscripts/n_dbsearch.php. (Accessed July 26, 2012).
2. Choi J-Y, Ramachandran G, Kandlikar M. The impact of toxicity testing costs on nanomaterial regulation. Environ Sci Technol 2009, 43:3030-3034.
3. Lai DY. Toward toxicity testing of nanomaterials in the 21st century: a paradigm for moving forward. WIREs Nanomed Nanobiotechnol 2012, 4:1-15.
4. Hartung T, Sabbioni E. Alternative in vitro assays in nanomaterial toxicology. WIREs Nanomed Nanobiotechnol 2011, 3:545-573.
5. Thomas CR, George S, Horst AM, Ji Z, Miller RJ, Peralta-Videa JR, Xia T, Pokhrel S, Madler L, Gardea-Torresdey JL, et al. Nanomaterials in the environment: from materials to high-throughput screening to organisms. ACS Nano 2011, 5:13-20.
6. Rushton EK, Jiang J, Leonard SS, Eberly S, Castranova V, Biswas P, Elder A, Han X, Gelein R, Finkelstein J, et al. Concept of assessing nanoparticle hazards considering nanoparticle dosemetric and chemical/biological response metrics. J Toxicol Environ Health A 2010, 73:445-461.
7. Joint Research Centre (JRC). Systems toxicology. Available at: http://projects.jrc.ec.europa.eu/jpb_public/act/publicexportworkprogramme.html?actId=474&d-2325611-p=3. (Accessed July 26, 2012).
8. U.S. EnvironmentalProtectionAgency. Nanomaterial Research Strategy (NRS). 2009.Available at: http://www.epa.gov/nanoscience/files/nanotech_research_strategy_final.pdf. (Accessed April 28, 2013).
9. Nel A, Grainger D, Alvarez P, Badesha S, Castronova V, Ferrari M, Godwin H, Grodzinski P, Morris J, Savage N, et al. Nanotechnology environmental, health, and safety issues. In: Roco MC, Mirkin CA, Hersam MC, eds. Nanotechnology Research Directions for Societal Needs in 2020 Retrospective and Outlook. Boston, MA; Berlin: Springer; 2010, 105-154.
10. Committee on Toxicity Testing and Assessment of Environmental Agents - National Research Council. Toxicity Testing in the 21st Century: A Vision and a Strategy Washington, D.C.: The National Academies Press; 2007.
11. British Standards (BSi). PD 6699-1:2007 nanotechnologies-Part 1: Good Practice Guide for Specifying Manufactured Nanomaterials. 2007. Available at: http://shop.bsigroup.com/en/forms/Nano/PD-6699-1/. (Accessed April 28 2013).
12. Yu L, Andriola A. Quantitative gold nanoparticle analysis methods: a review. Talanta 2010, 82:869-875.
13. Hassellöv M, Readman J, Ranville J, Tiede K. Nanoparticle analysis and characterization methodologies in environmental risk assessment of engineered nanoparticles. Ecotoxicology 2008, 17:344-361.
14. Luykx DMAM, Peters RJB, van Ruth SM, Bouwmeester H. A review of analytical methods for the identification and characterization of nano delivery systems in food. J Agric Food Chem 2008, 56:8231-8247.
15. Tiede K, Boxall ABA, Tear SP, Lewis J, David H, Hassellöv M. Detection and characterization of engineered nanoparticles in food and the environment. Food Addit Contam Part A Chem Anal Control Expo Risk Assess 2008, 25:795-821.
16. Fedotov P, Vanifatova N, Shkinev V, Spivakov B. Fractionation and characterization of nano- and microparticles in liquid media. Anal Bioanal Chem 2011, 400:1787-1804.
17. Murashov V, Howard J, eds. Nanotechnology Standards. New York: Springer; 2011.
18. Scialli AR. The challenge of reproductive and developmental toxicology under REACH. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol 2008, 51:244-250.
19. Lipinski C, Hopkins A. Navigating chemical space for biology and medicine. Nature 2004, 432:855-861.
20. Inglese J, Auld DS, Jadhav A, Johnson RL, Simeonov A, Yasgar A, Zheng W, Austin CP. Quantitative high-throughput screening: a titration-based approach that efficiently identifies biological activities in large chemical libraries. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2006, 103:11473-11478.
21. Nel A, Xia T, Meng H, Wang X, Lin S, Ji Z, Zhang H. Nanomaterial toxicity testing in the 21st century: use of a predictive toxicological approach and high-throughput screening. Acc Chem Res 2013, 46:607-621.
22. Shaw SY, Westly EC, Pittet MJ, Subramanian A, Schreiber SL, Weissleder R. Perturbational profiling of nanomaterial biologic activity. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2008, 105:7387-7392.
23. Harper SL, Carriere JL, Miller JM, Hutchison JE, Maddux BL, Tanguay RL. Systematic evaluation of nanomaterial toxicity: utility of standardized materials and rapid assays. ACS Nano 2011, 5:4688-4697. doi: 10.1021/nn200546k.
24. Rogers EJ, Hsieh SF, Organti N, Schmidt D, Bello D. A high throughput in vitro analytical approach to screen for oxidative stress potential exerted by nanomaterials using a biologically relevant matrix: human blood serum. Toxicol In Vitro 2008, 22:1639-1647.
25. George S, Pokhrel S, Xia T, Gilbert B, Ji Z, Schowalter M, Rosenauer A, Damoiseaux R, Bradley KA, Madler L, et al. Use of a rapid cytotoxicity screening approach to engineer a safer zinc oxide nanoparticle through iron doping. ACS Nano 2010, 4:15-29.
26. Wang A, Berg EL, Polokoff M, Yang J, Reif D, Kleinstreuer N, Marinakos S, Badireddy AR, Gangwal S, Matson C, et al. Nanomaterial (NM) bioactivity profiling by ToxCast high-throughput screening (HTS). In: Society of Toxicology 51st Annual Meeting and ToxExpo. San Francisco, CA: Society of Toxicology; 2012.
27. Pluskota A, Horzowski E, Bossinger O, von Mikecz A. In Caenorhabditis elegans nanoparticle-bio-interactions become transparent: silica-nanoparticles induce reproductive senescence. PLoS One 2009, 4:e6622.
28. Kuhlbusch TA, Asbach C, Fissan H, Gohler D, Stintz M. Nanoparticle exposure at nanotechnology workplaces: a review. Part Fibre Toxicol 2011, 8:22.
29. Curwin B, Bertke S. Exposure characterization of metal oxide nanoparticles in the workplace. J Occup Environ Hyg 2011, 8:580-587.
30. George S, Xia T, Rallo R, Zhao Y, Ji Z, Lin S, Wang X, Zhang H, France B, Schoenfeld D, et al. Use of a high-throughput screening approach coupled with in vivo zebrafish embryo screening to develop hazard ranking for engineered nanomaterials. ACS Nano 2011, 5:1805-1817.
31. Fourches D, Pu DQY, Tassa C, Weissleder R, Shaw SY, Mumper RJ, Tropsha A. Quantitative nanostructure-activity relationship modeling. ACS Nano 2010, 4:5703-5712.
32. Burello E, Worth AP. QSAR modeling of nanomaterials. WIREs Nanomed Nanobiotechnol 2011, 3:298-306. doi: 10.1002/wnan.1137.
33. Liu R, Rallo R, George S, Ji Z, Nair S, Nel AE, Cohen Y. Classification NanoSAR development for cytotoxicity of metal oxide nanoparticles. Small 2011, 7:1118-1126.
34. PROSPECT. Protocol for Nanoparticle Dispersion. 2010. Available at: http://www.nanotechia.org/sites/default/files/PROSPECT_Dispersion_Protocol.pdf. (Accessed April 28 2013).
35. Murdock RC, Braydich-Stolle L, Schrand AM, Schlager JJ, Hussain SM. Characterization of nanomaterial dispersion in solution prior to in vitro exposure using dynamic light scattering technique. Toxicol Sci 2008, 101:239-253.
36. Glover RD, Miller JM, Hutchison JE. Generation of metal nanoparticles from silver and copper objects: nanoparticle dynamics on surfaces and potential sources of nanoparticles in the environment. ACS Nano 2011, 5:8950-8957.
37. Sanders K, Degn LL, Mundy WR, Zucker RM, Dreher K, Zhao B, Roberts JE, Boyes WK. In vitro phototoxicity and hazard identification of nano-scale titanium dioxide. Toxicol Appl Pharmacol 2012, 258:226-236.
38. Alkilany AM, Lohse SE, Murphy CJ. The gold standard: gold nanoparticle libraries to understand the nano-bio interface. Acc Chem Res 2013, 46:650-661.
39. Christensen KA, Myers JT, Swanson JA. pH-dependent regulation of lysosomal calcium in macrophages. J Cell Sci 2002, 115:599-607.
40. Seksek O, Bolard J. Nuclear pH gradient in mammalian cells revealed by laser microspectrofluorimetry. J Cell Sci 1996, 109(Pt 1):257-262.
41. Bouwmeester H, Lynch I, Marvin HJ, Dawson KA, Berges M, Braguer D, Byrne HJ, Casey A, Chambers G, Clift MJ, et al. Minimal analytical characterization of engineered nanomaterials needed for hazard assessment in biological matrices. Nanotoxicology 2011, 5:1-11.
42. Stone V, Nowack B, Baun A, van den Brink N, von der Kammer F, Dusinska M, Handy R, Hankin S, Hassellöv M, Joner E, et al. Nanomaterials for environmental studies: classification, reference material issues, and strategies for physico-chemical characterisation. Sci Total Environ 2010, 408:1745-1754.
43. ISO/IEC/NIST/OECD. ISO, IEC, NIST and OECD International Workshop on Documentary Standards for Measurement and Characterization for Nanotechnologies. 2008. Available at: http://www.iso.org/sites/nanotech/assets/final_report.pdf. (Accessed April 28 2013).
44. Boverhof D, David R. Nanomaterial characterization: considerations and needs for hazard assessment and safety evaluation. Anal Bioanal Chem 2010, 396:953-961.
45. French Government. Décret n° 2012-232 du 17 février 2012 relatif à la déclaration annuelle des substances à l'état nanoparticulaire pris en application de l'article L. 523-4 du code de l'environnement (in French). 2012.
46. The SAFENANO Team. ...the French decree for mandatory reporting of nanomaterials. Available at: http://www.safenano.org/KnowledgeBase/CurrentAwareness/IntheKnow/FrenchDecree.aspx. (Accessed February 23, 2013).
47. Nanomaterial Registry. Nanomaterial Registry beta. Available at: https://www.nanomaterialregistry.org/about/MIAN.aspx. (Accessed June 26, 2012).
48. FDA (Food and Drug Administration). Draft Guidance: Guidance for Industry Safety of Nanomaterials in Cosmetic Products. 2012. Available at: http://www.fda.gov/downloads/Cosmetics/GuidanceComplianceRegulatoryInformation/GuidanceDocuments/UCM300932.pdf. (Accessed April 28 2013).
49. 2 T 805. Available at: http://www.novochem.ro/letoltes/aeroxide%20tio2%20t805%20en.pdf. (Accessed November 15, 2012).
50. Maynard AD, Aitken RJ. Assessing exposure to airborne nanomaterials: current abilities and future requirements. Nanotoxicology 2007, 1:26-41.
51. Landsiedel R, Ma-Hock L, Kroll A, Hahn D, Schnekenburger J, Wiench K, Wohlleben W. Testing metal-oxide nanomaterials for human safety. Adv Mater 2010, 22:2601-2627.
52. Pettitt ME, Lead JR. Minimum physicochemical characterisation requirements for nanomaterial regulation. Environ Int 2013, 52:41-50.
53. NIEHS. Nanotechnology Consortiums. Available at: http://www.niehs.nih.gov/research/supported/dert/cospb/programs/nanotech/index.cfm. (Accessed September 14, 2012).
54. Gernand J, Casman E. A meta-analysis of carbon nanotube pulmonary toxicity studies-how physical dimensions and impurities affect the toxicity of carbon nanotubes. 2012. Available at: http://www.andrew.cmu.edu/user/jgernand/carbon_nanotube_tox.pdf. (Accessed April 28 2013).
55. Fubini B, Ghiazza M, Fenoglio I. Physico-chemical features of engineered nanoparticles relevant to their toxicity. Nanotoxicology 2010, 4:347-363.
56. Landsiedel R, Fabian E, Ma-Hock L, Wohlleben W, Wiench K, Oesch F, van Ravenzwaay B. Toxico-/biokinetics of nanomaterials. Arch Toxicol 2012, 86:1021-1060.
57. ISO. Nanotechnologies-Guidance on physico-chemical characterization of engineered nanoscale materials for toxicologic assessment. Technical Report ISO/TR 13041, 2012.
58. 2 and ZnO nanoparticles. Environ Sci Technol 2012, 46:6934-6941.
59. Muller J, Huaux F, Fonseca A, Nagy JB, Moreau N, Delos M, Raymundo-Pinero E, Beguin F, Kirsch-Volders M, Fenoglio I, et al. Structural defects play a major role in the acute lung toxicity of multiwall carbon nanotubes: toxicological aspects. Chem Res Toxicol 2008, 21:1698-1705.
60. Fenoglio I, Greco G, Tomatis M, Muller J, Raymundo-Pinero E, Beguin F, Fonseca A, Nagy JB, Lison D, Fubini B. Structural defects play a major role in the acute lung toxicity of multiwall carbon nanotubes: physicochemical aspects. Chem Res Toxicol 2008, 21:1690-1697.
61. George S, Lin S, Ji Z, Thomas CR, Li L, Mecklenburg M, Meng H, Wang X, Zhang H, Xia T. et al. ACS Nano: Surface defects on plate-shaped silver nanoparticles contribute to its hazard potential in a fish gill cell line and zebrafish embryos; 2012, 6:3745-3759.
62. Wepasnick K, Smith B, Bitter J, Howard Fairbrother D. Chemical and structural characterization of carbon nanotube surfaces. Anal Bioanal Chem 2010, 396:1003-1014.
63. Shatkin JA. Nanotechnology: Health and Environmental Risks (Perspectives in Nanotechnology). Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press; 2008.
64. Davis JM. How to assess the risk of nanotechnology: learning from past experience. J Nanosci Nanotechnol 2007, 7:402-409.
65. Linkov I, Seager TP. Coupling multi-criteria decision analysis, life-cycle assessment, and risk assessment for emerging threats. Environ Sci Technol 2011, 45:5068-5074.
66. Powers CM, Dana G, Gillespie P, Gwinn MR, Hendren CO, Long TC, Wang A, Davis JM. Comprehensive environmental assessment: a meta-assessment approach. Environ Sci Technol 2012, 46:9202-9208.
67. Nanomaterial Case Studies: Nanoscale Titanium Dioxide in Water Treatment and in Topical Sunscreen (Final Report). 2010. EPA/600/R-09/057F. Available at: http://cfpub.epa.gov/ncea/cfm/recordisplay.cfm?deid=230972. (Accessed April 28 2013).
68. EPA US. Nanomaterial Case Study: Nanoscale Silver in Disinfectant Spray (Final Report). 2012. EPA/600/R-10/081F. Available at: http://cfpub.epa.gov/ncea/cfm/recordisplay.cfm?deid=241665. (Accessed April 28 2013).
69. Badireddy AR, Wiesner MR, Liu J. Detection, characterization, and abundance of engineered nanoparticles in complex waters by hyperspectral imagery with enhanced darkfield microscopy. Environ Sci Technol 2012, 46:10081-10088.
70. Tuoriniemi J, Cornelis G, Hassellöv M. Size discrimination and detection capabilities of single-particle ICPMS for environmental analysis of silver nanoparticles. Anal Chem 2012, 84:3965-3972.
71. Hays MD, Cho S-H, Baldauf R, Schauer JJ, Shafer M. Particle size distributions of metal and non-metal elements in an urban near-highway environment. Atmos Environ 2011, 45:925-934.
72. NanoSight. NanoSight seeing is believing. Available at: http://www.nanosight.com/. (Accessed August 9, 2012).
73. Gonzalez-Nilo F, Perez-Acle T, Guinez-Molinos S, Geraldo DA, Sandoval C, Yevenes A, Santos LS, Laurie VF, Mendoza H, Cachau RE. Nanoinformatics: an emerging area of information technology at the intersection of bioinformatics, computational chemistry and nanobiotechnology. Biol Res 2011, 44:43-51.
74. Thomas DG, Pappu RV, Baker NA. Nanoparticle ontology for cancer nanotechnology research. J Biomed Inform 2011, 44:59-74.
75. Teeguarden JG, Hinderliter PM, Orr G, Thrall BD, Pounds JG. Particokinetics in vitro: dosimetry considerations for in vitro nanoparticle toxicity assessments. Toxicol Sci 2007, 95:300-312.
76. Cho EC, Zhang Q, Xia Y. The effect of sedimentation and diffusion on cellular uptake of gold nanoparticles. Nat Nanotechnol 2011, 6:385-391.
77. Allen HJ, Impellitteri CA, Macke DA, Heckman JL, Poynton HC, Lazorchak JM, Govindaswamy S, Roose DL, Nadagouda MN. Effects from filtration, capping agents, and presence/absence of food on the toxicity of silver nanoparticles to Daphnia magna. Environ Toxicol Chem 2010, 29:2742-2750.
78. Badawy AME, Luxton TP, Silva RG, Scheckel KG, Suidan MT, Tolaymat TM. Impact of environmental conditions (pH, ionic strength, and electrolyte type) on the surface charge and aggregation of silver nanoparticles suspensions. Environ Sci Technol 2010, 44:1260-1266.
79. Kim KT, Jang MH, Kim JY, Xing B, Tanguay RL, Lee BG, Kim SD. Embryonic toxicity changes of organic nanomaterials in the presence of natural organic matter. Sci Total Environ 2012, 426:423-429.
80. Edgington AJ, Roberts AP, Taylor LM, Alloy MM, Reppert J, Rao AM, Mao J, Klaine SJ. The influence of natural organic matter on the toxicity of multiwalled carbon nanotubes. Environ Toxicol Chem 2010, 29:2511-2518.
81. Bone AJ, Colman BP, Gondikas AP, Newton KM, Harrold KH, Cory RM, Unrine JM, Klaine SJ, Matson CW, Di Giulio RT. Biotic and abiotic interactions in aquatic microcosms determine fate and toxicity of Ag nanoparticles: Part 2-Toxicity and Ag speciation. Environ Sci Technol 2012, 46:6925-6933.
82. Unrine JM, Colman BP, Bone AJ, Gondikas AP, Matson CW. Biotic and abiotic interactions in aquatic microcosms determine fate and toxicity of Ag nanoparticles. Part 1. Aggregation and dissolution. Environ Sci Technol 2012, 46:6915-6924.
83. Lin D, Liu N, Yang K, Xing B, Wu F. Different stabilities of multiwalled carbon nanotubes in fresh surface water samples. Environ Pollut 2010, 158:1270-1274.
84. Maiorano G, Sabella S, Sorce B, Brunetti V, Malvindi MA, Cingolani R, Pompa PP. Effects of cell culture media on the dynamic formation of protein-nanoparticle complexes and influence on the cellular response. ACS Nano 2010, 4:7481-7491.
85. Powers CM, Badireddy AR, Ryde IT, Seidler FJ, Slotkin TA. Silver nanoparticles compromise neurodevelopment in PC12 cells: critical contributions of silver ion, particle size, coating, and composition. Environ Health Perspect 2011, 119:37-44.
86. Lordan S, Higginbotham CL. Effect of serum concentration on the cytotoxicity of clay particles. Cell Biol Int 2012, 36:57-61.
87. Minocha S, Mumper RJ. Effect of carbon coating on the physico-chemical properties and toxicity of copper and nickel nanoparticles. Small 2012, 8:3289-3299.
88. Guo L, Von Dem Bussche A, Buechner M, Yan A, Kane AB, Hurt RH. Adsorption of essential micronutrients by carbon nanotubes and the implications for nanotoxicity testing. Small 2008, 4:721-727.
89. 2 nanoparticles under solar radiation to two aquatic species: Daphnia magna and Japanese medaka. Environ Toxicol Chem 2012, 31:1621-1629.
90. Bogner A, Thollet G, Basset D, Jouneau PH, Gauthier C. Wet STEM: a new development in environmental SEM for imaging nano-objects included in a liquid phase. Ultramicroscopy 2005, 104:290-301.
91. Monteiro-Riviere NA, Inman AO, Zhang LW. Limitations and relative utility of screening assays to assess engineered nanoparticle toxicity in a human cell line. Toxicol Appl Pharmacol 2009, 234:222-235.
92. Han X, Gelein R, Corson N, Wade-Mercer P, Jiang J, Biswas P, Finkelstein JN, Elder A, Oberdorster G. Validation of an LDH assay for assessing nanoparticle toxicity. Toxicology 2011, 287:99-104.
93. 2. Toxicol In Vitro 2011, 25:2147-2151.
94. Worle-Knirsch JM, Pulskamp K, Krug HF. Oops they did it again! Carbon nanotubes hoax scientists in viability assays. Nano Lett 2006, 6:1261-1268.
95. Lin W, Xu Y, Huang C-C, Ma Y, Shannon KB, Chen D-R, Huang Y-W. Toxicity of nano- and micro-sized ZnO particles in human lung epithelial cells. J Nanopart Res 2009, 11:25-39.
96. 2 nanoparticles in cells by flow cytometry. Cytometry A 2010, 77:677-685.
97. Shwartz M. Scientists develop new color-coded test for protein folding. Available at: http://news.stanford.edu/news/2005/march30/gold-033005.html. (Accessed July 26, 2012).
98. Stone V, Johnston H, Schins RP. Development of in vitro systems for nanotoxicology: methodological considerations. Crit Rev Toxicol 2009, 39:613-626.
99. Richman EK, Hutchison JE. The nanomaterial characterization bottleneck. ACS Nano 2009, 3:2441-2446.
100. Quantachrome Instruments. QUADRASORB™ SI Four Station Surface Area Analyzer and Pore Size Analyzer. Available at: http://www.quantachrome.com/gassorption/quadrasorbsi.html. (Accessed July 26, 2012).
101. Wyatt Technology Europe GmbH. DynaPro™ Plate Reader. Available at: http://www.wyatt.de/index.php?id=dynapro-plate-reader. (Accessed July 26, 2012)
102. Rigaku Corporation and its Global Subsidiaries. Multipurpose X-ray diffraction system. Available at: http://www.rigaku.com/products/xrd/ultima. (Accessed August 9, 2012).
103. Shimadzu Scientific Instruments. ICPE-9000 Atomic Spectroscopy. Available at: http://www.ssi.shimadzu.com/products/product.cfm?product=icpe-9000. (Acc-essed July 26, 2012).
104. Perkel JM. No Mo' Slow Flow. Tools and tricks for high-throughput flow cytometry. Available at: http://www.the-scientist.com/?articles.view/articleNo/31538/title/No-Mo--Slow-Flow/. (Accessed October 15, 2012).
105. European Commission. The ACTION-Grid White Paper on Nanoinformatics. 2010. Available at: http://www.action-grid.eu/documents/Final%20White%20Paper%20-%20Nano.pdf. (Accessed April 28 2013).
106. Yang C, Wang A, Houck K, McCarthy A. Ontology development for nanomaterials safety. In: 5th Meeting on U.S. Government Chemical Databases and Open Chemistry. Frederick, MD; 2011.
107. US-EU.org. US-EU nanoEHS dialogue. Available at: http://us-eu.org. (Accessed July 26, 2012).
108. Klaessig F, Marrapese M, Abe S. Current perspectives in nanotechnology terminology and nomenclature. In: Murashov V, Howard J, eds. Nanotechnology Standards. New York Springer:; 2011, 21-52.
109. Gentleman DJ, Chan WCW. A systematic nomenclature for codifying engineered nanostructures. Small 2009, 5:426-431.
110. NSTC Committee on Technology-Subcommittee on Nanoscale Science and Technology. Nanotechnology signature initiative. Nanotechnology knowledge infrastructure: enabling national leadership in sustainable design. Available at: http://nano.gov/sites/default/files/pub_resource/nki_nsi_white_paper_-_final_for_web.pdf. (Accessed September 1, 2012).
111. Nanoinformatics 2012. Nanoinformatics Webinar Presentations. Available at: http://nanoinformatics.org/2012/webinar. (Accessed September 1, 2012).
112. Gajewicz A, Rasulev B, Dinadayalane TC, Urbaszek P, Puzyn T, Leszczynska D, Leszczynski J. Advancing risk assessment of engineered nanomaterials: application of computational approaches. Adv Drug Deliv Rev 2012, 64:1663-1693.
113. Money ES, Reckhow KH, Wiesner MR. The use of Bayesian networks for nanoparticle risk forecasting: model formulation and baseline evaluation. Sci Total Environ 2012, 426:436-445.
114. Van Duuren-Stuurman B, Vink SR, Verbist KJ, Heussen HG, Brouwer DH, Kroese DE, Van Niftrik MF, Tielemans E, Fransman W. Stoffenmanager nano version 1.0: a web-based tool for risk prioritization of airborne manufactured nano objects. Ann Occup Hyg 2012, 56:525-541.