Differential Toxicity of Carbon Nanomaterials in Drosophila: Larval Dietary Uptake Is Benign, but Adult Exposure Causes Locomotor Impairment and Mortality

Department of Chemistry, Division of Engineering, Institute for Molecular and Nanoscale Innovation, Brown University, Providence, Rhode Island 02912, USA.
Environmental Science and Technology (Impact Factor: 5.48). 08/2009; 43(16):6357-63. DOI: 10.1021/es901079z
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Rapid growth in nanomaterial manufacturing is raising concerns about potential adverse effects on the environment. Nanoparticle contact with intact organisms in the wild may lead to different biological responses than those observed in laboratory cell-based toxicity assays. In nature, the scale and chemistry of nanoparticles coupled with the surface properties, texture, and behaviors of the organisms will influence biologically significant exposure and ultimate toxicity. We used larval and adult Drosophila melanogaster to study the effects of carbon nanomaterial exposure under several different scenarios. Dietary uptake of fullerene C60, carbon black (CB), or single-walled or multiwalled nanotubes (SWNTs, MWNTs) delivered through the food to the larval stage had no detectable effect on egg to adult survivorship, despite evidence that the nanomaterials are taken up and become sequestered in tissue. However, when these same nanocarbons were exposed in dry form to adults, some materials (CB, SWNTs) adhered extensively to fly surfaces, overwhelmed natural grooming mechanisms, and led to impaired locomotor function and mortality. Others (C60, MWNT arrays) adhered weakly, could be removed by grooming, and did not reduce locomotor function or survivorship. Evidence is presented that these differences are primarily due to differences in nanomaterial superstructure, or aggregation state, and that the combination of adhesion and grooming can lead to active fly borne nanoparticle transport.

  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Titanium dioxide nanoparticles (TiO2 NPs) are widely used for preparations of sunscreens, cosmetics, food and personal care products. However, the possible genotoxic risk associated with this nano-scale material exposure is not clear, especially in whole organisms. In the present study, we explored the in vivo genotoxic activity of TiO2 NPs as well as their TiO2 bulk form using two well-established genotoxic assays, the wing spot test and the comet assay in Drosophila melanogaster. To determine the extent of tissue damage induced by TiO2 NPs in Drosophila larvae, the trypan blue dye exclusion test was also applied. Both compounds were supplied to third instar larvae by ingestion at concentration ranging from 0.08 to 1.60mg/mL. The results obtained in the present study indicate that TiO2 NPs can reach and induce cytotoxic effects on midgut and imaginal disc tissues of larvae, but they do not promote genotoxicity in the wing-spot test of Drosophila. However, when both nano- and large-size forms of TiO2 were evaluated with the comet assay in Drosophila hemocytes, a significant increase in DNA damage, with a direct dose-response pattern, was observed for TiO2 NPs. The results obtained with the comet assay suggest that the primary DNA damage associated with TiO2 NPs exposure in Drosophila could be associated with specific physico-chemical properties of nano-TiO2, since no effects were observed with the bulk form. This study remarks the usefulness of using more than one genetic end-point in the evaluation of the genotoxic potential of nanomaterials. Copyright © 2014 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
    Mutation Research/Genetic Toxicology and Environmental Mutagenesis 01/2015; 778:12-21. DOI:10.1016/j.mrgentox.2014.12.004 · 2.48 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Nanogenotoxicology is an emergent area of research aiming to determine the potential risk of nanomaterials. Since most of the established studies use in vitro approaches, neglecting the repair and metabolic properties of the whole organism, some doubts about the accuracy of the obtained results exist. To overcome this gap more in vivo approaches testing the potential genotoxic risk of nanomaterials are required. In this context we propose to use Drosophila melanogaster as a useful model to study the possible genotoxic risk associated to nanoparticles exposure. Until now, only few studies have been carried out and they all use the wing-spot assay that detects the induction of somatic mutation and recombination events in the wing imaginal disks. This test is based on the principle that the loss of heterozygosis and the corresponding expression of the suitable recessive markers, multiple wing hairs and flare-3, can lead to the formation of mutant clone cells in growing up larvae, which are expressed as mutant spots on the wings of adult flies. The protocol to perform the wing-spot assay is presented.
    Genotoxicity and DNA Repair - A Practical Approach, XII edited by Sierra, L. María, Gaivão, Isabel (Eds, 08/2014: chapter 17: pages 483; Springer - Humana Press., ISBN: 978-1-4939-1067-0
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Abstract Drosophila melanogaster has been used as an in vivo model organism for the study of genetics and development since 100 years ago. Recently, the fruit fly Drosophila was also developed as an in vivo model organism for toxicology studies, in particular, the field of nanotoxicity. The incorporation of nanomaterials into consumer and biomedical products is a cause for concern as nanomaterials are often associated with toxicity in many in vitro studies. In vivo animal studies of the toxicity of nanomaterials with rodents and other mammals are, however, limited due to high operational cost and ethical objections. Hence, Drosophila, a genetically tractable organism with distinct developmental stages and short life cycle, serves as an ideal organism to study nanomaterial-mediated toxicity. This review discusses the basic biology of Drosophila, the toxicity of nanomaterials, as well as how the Drosophila model can be used to study the toxicity of various types of nanomaterials.
    Nanotoxicology 07/2014; DOI:10.3109/17435390.2014.940405 · 7.34 Impact Factor

Full-text (2 Sources)

Available from
Jun 4, 2014