Skip to main content

Table 2 Comparison of agglomeration size, reactivity, solubility, and EC50 of algae (R. subcapitata) toxicity of different nanoforms of CeO2, Fe2O3, and TiO2

From: Hazard grouping of nanomaterials for daphnia and algae toxicity: lessons learned from scientific projects for regulatory applicability

CeO2Primary particle size (nm)Surface reactivity in OECD mediumSolubility 72 h (µg/l) 1 g/l in OECD mediumEC50 mg/l (nominal)Fe2O3Primary particle size (nm)Surface reactivity in OECD mediumSolubility (%) of 1 g/l in OECD mediumEC50 mg/l (nominal)TiO2Primary particle size (nm)Surface reactivity in OECD mediumSolubility 72 h (µg/l) 1 g/l in OECD mediumEC50 mg/l (nominal)
Agglomerate size in OECD medium—z. average (nm) 100 mg/lAgglomerate size in OECD medium—z.average (nm) 100 mgAgglomerate size in OECD medium—z.average (nm) 100 mg/l
NM 211a4–5CPH 0.78 ± 0.17
DMPO 0.81 ± 0.05
3.98.5Fe2O3_nano_Ab37EPR: CPH 0.789
DMPO 1.297
0 (24 h, 96 h)3.6Undoped anatasa15CPH 0.66 ± 0.15 DMPO 0.71 ± 0.09 DMPO irradiation 1.48 ± 0.11< 0.50.38
442n.d.2664
NM 212a40CPH 0.74 ± 0.23
DMPO 0.96 ± 0.15
< 0.55.6Fe2O3_nano_Bb15 × 4–21 (rods)EPR: CPH 0.84
DMPO 1.105
0 (24 h, 96 h)2.4EU-doped rutila19CPH 0.85 ± 0.30 DMPO 0.7 ± 0.1 DMPO irradiation 1.41 ± 0.090.70.91
831n.d.1612
NM 213a33–35CPH 0.85 ± 0.07
DMPO 1.07 ± 0.12
0.6743.8Fe2O3_largerb48 ± 27EPR: CPH 14.05
DMPO 8.143
n.d.111Fe-doped rutila10CPH 0.83 ± 0.11 DMPO 1.0 ± 0.1 DMPO irradiation 1.38 ± 0.079.13.6
1042n.d.1866
          NM 105b25EPR: CPH 0.577 DMPO 1.002 DMPO irradiation 20.789n.d.4.7
n.d.
          NM 104b29EPR: CPH 0.796 DMPO 1.108 DMPO irradiation 1.566n.d.63
n.d.
  1. aPublished in [8]
  2. bPublished in [9]