Carbon Nanomaterials: Comparison
View Latest Version
Please note this is a comparison between Version 2 by Catherine Yang and Version 1 by Danica Jović.

Being a member of nanofamily, carbon nanomaterials exhibit specific properties that mostly arise from their small size. They have proved as very promising for the application in the technical and biomedical fields. A wide spectrum of use implies the inevitable presence of carbon nanomaterials in the environment, thus potentially endangering the whole nature. Although scientists worldwide have conducted researches investigating the impact of these materials, it is evident that there are still significant gaps concerning the knowledge of their mechanisms, as well as prolonged and chronic exposure and effects. Thinking small can greatly help us improve our lives, but also obliges us to deeply and comprehensively investigate all the possible consequences that could arise from our pure-hearted scientific ambitions and work.

  • carbon nanomaterials
  • fullerene
  • nanodiamonds
  • carbon dots
  • graphene
  • carbon nanotubes
  • toxicity
  • in vitro & in vivo research

1. Introduction

Carbon has been extensively investigated, especially in the form of carbon nanomaterials (CNMs), and it seemed to behave like a magnet for the Nobel Prize (in 1996 ”for the discovery of carbon atoms bound in the form of a ball,”, and in 2010 ”for groundbreaking experiments regarding the two-dimensional material graphene”). In the last four decades, carbon has expanded its family of novel nanomaterials, which now includes fullerenes, carbon dots (CD), nanodiamonds (NDs), nanohorns (CNHs), nanofibers (CNFs), nanotubes (CNTs), graphene, etc. Carbon nanomaterials usually do not consist of chemical individuals, but form complex mixtures of compounds that only slightly differ in molecular weight, structure, isomerism, etc. It is also known that some of these materials possess different properties and structures if they come from different manufacturers or are even from different lots. Hence, it is difficult to assess the properties of entire groups of materials; instead, group representatives are discussed.

Carbon has been extensively investigated, especially in the form of carbon nanomaterials (CNMs), and it seemed to behave like a magnet for the Nobel Prize (in 1996 ”for the discovery of carbon atoms bound in the form of a ball,”, and in 2010 ”for groundbreaking experiments regarding the two-dimensional material graphene”). In the last four decades, carbon has expanded its family of novel nanomaterials, which now includes fullerenes, carbon dots (CD), nanodiamonds (NDs), nanohorns (CNHs), nanofibers (CNFs), nanotubes (CNTs), graphene, etc. Carbon nanomaterials usually do not consist of chemical individuals, but form complex mixtures of compounds that only slightly differ in molecular weight, structure, isomerism, etc. It is also known that some of these materials possess different properties and structures if they come from different manufacturers or are even from different lots. Hence, it is difficult to assess the properties of entire groups of materials; instead, group representatives are discussed.

Carbon nanomaterials, as well as their impact, are greatly defined by their physico-chemical properties

Carbon nanomaterials, as well as their impact, are greatly defined by their physico-chemical properties

[1][2][3]. Shape, size, solubility, charge, surface, and chemical functionalization of the nanoparticles are some of the properties that make the system more or less stable and prone to aggregation and self-assembly. By chemical transformation, CNMs can be successfully transformed into more polar or soluble derivatives, thus overcoming one of the greatest obstacles when it comes to the application in biological media. An inevitable consequence of the extensive production and widespread application of nanomaterials is their consequential presence in the environment. Before they are settled in soil or continue to flow within water sources, nanomaterials can be transformed as a result of different processes, thus changing their native properties

. Shape, size, solubility, charge, surface, and chemical functionalization of the nanoparticles are some of the properties that make the system more or less stable and prone to aggregation and self-assembly. By chemical transformation, CNMs can be successfully transformed into more polar or soluble derivatives, thus overcoming one of the greatest obstacles when it comes to the application in biological media. An inevitable consequence of the extensive production and widespread application of nanomaterials is their consequential presence in the environment. Before they are settled in soil or continue to flow within water sources, nanomaterials can be transformed as a result of different processes, thus changing their native properties

[4][5][6]. Accumulation of nanomaterials in the soil and water makes these areas nanointoxicated and, as such, with the yet unravelled potential of causing various effects in plants, animals, fungi, microorganisms, and, consequently, humans. As nanotechnology has bloomed and still has a lot to go until reaching its zenith, the impact of nanomaterials is of utmost importance to be fully addressed. The possible risks and toxicity

. Accumulation of nanomaterials in the soil and water makes these areas nanointoxicated and, as such, with the yet unravelled potential of causing various effects in plants, animals, fungi, microorganisms, and, consequently, humans. As nanotechnology has bloomed and still has a lot to go until reaching its zenith, the impact of nanomaterials is of utmost importance to be fully addressed. The possible risks and toxicity

[7][8][9]

of nanomaterials (

Figure 1) have attracted the interest of scientists worldwide. Although a great amount of research has been performed so far, this venture is still in its infancy.

) have attracted the interest of scientists worldwide. Although a great amount of research has been performed so far, this venture is still in its infancy.

Nanomaterials 10 01508 g001 550
Figure 1. Pros and cons for the carbon nanomaterials (CNMs) use, original figure.

Pros and cons for the carbon nanomaterials (CNMs) use, original figure.

 
In this review paper, we have selected the most prominent members of the carbon nanomaterial family, briefly summarized their main characteristics and potential application, as well as described their toxicity following the

In this review paper, we have selected the most prominent members of the carbon nanomaterial family, briefly summarized their main characteristics and potential application, as well as described their toxicity following the

in vitro

and

in vivo results.

results.

2. General Properties of Carbon Nanomaterials

Hybridization and bonding between C atoms in carbon nanomaterials are some of the direct guides that classify materials within this group by their properties. For example, all the sp

Hybridization and bonding between C atoms in carbon nanomaterials are some of the direct guides that classify materials within this group by their properties. For example, all the sp

2

-structured nanomaterials share similar properties such as conductivity, mechanical strength, and reactivity; however, size and shape also make differences among them. For example, C

60

can be observed as easily soluble, among others, only slightly dispersible, carbon nanomaterials, which usually form unstable dispersions. Besides being sp

2

-structured, there is a group of nanodiamonds that are predominantly sp

3

-structured, and carbon dots that contain various ratios of sp

2

and sp

3 carbons

carbons

[10].

.

Carbon nanomaterials have so far found their purpose in optics, medical implants, medical electronics, tissue scaffolds, and sensors, as well as in other biomedical devices and as a promising drug/gene/vaccine-delivery system

Carbon nanomaterials have so far found their purpose in optics, medical implants, medical electronics, tissue scaffolds, and sensors, as well as in other biomedical devices and as a promising drug/gene/vaccine-delivery system

[11][12][13][14][15]

. Based on the dimensionality of their structure, carbon nanomaterials can be classified in one of the following groups: Zero-dimensional (0D), one-dimensional (1D), or two-dimensional (2D) materials (

Figure 2).

).

Nanomaterials 10 01508 g002 550
 
Figure 2.

The main physicochemical properties of different nanostructures fullerene (C

60

); fullerenol (C

60

(OH)

24); carbon dots (CDs); nanodiamonds (NDs); single-walled carbon nanotube (SWCNT); multi-walled carbon nanotube (MWCNT); graphene oxide (GO).

); carbon dots (CDs); nanodiamonds (NDs); single-walled carbon nanotube (SWCNT); multi-walled carbon nanotube (MWCNT); graphene oxide (GO).

3. Biological Effects of Carbon Nanomaterials

Some excellent properties of carbon nanoparticles (CNPs) result in their wide application in different fields including biomedicine and cosmetology. For instance, CNPs might be used for drug delivery, regenerative medicine, and cancer diagnosis and therapy

Some excellent properties of carbon nanoparticles (CNPs) result in their wide application in different fields including biomedicine and cosmetology. For instance, CNPs might be used for drug delivery, regenerative medicine, and cancer diagnosis and therapy

[16][17]

. However, their unique properties might also cause adverse health effects (

Figure 3).

).

Figure 3. Summary of the biological effects of carbon nanomaterials.

Summary of the biological effects of carbon nanomaterials.

 
Consequently, as DNA damage, caused by CNPs, may initiate and promote carcinogenesis, impact fertility, or contribute to ecogenotoxicity, a genotoxicological

Consequently, as DNA damage, caused by CNPs, may initiate and promote carcinogenesis, impact fertility, or contribute to ecogenotoxicity, a genotoxicological

[18][19] evaluation turns out to represent a vital area considering the health risk assessment. No less important is the fact that evaluation of the carcinogenic or mutagenic potential of new substances, and thus CNPs, is an important part of preclinical safety testing of novel pharmaceuticals, which is a necessity before moving on to Phase I/II clinical trials. In general, knowledge about the genotoxicity of the CNPs allows us to understand and then minimize the potential adverse effects

evaluation turns out to represent a vital area considering the health risk assessment. No less important is the fact that evaluation of the carcinogenic or mutagenic potential of new substances, and thus CNPs, is an important part of preclinical safety testing of novel pharmaceuticals, which is a necessity before moving on to Phase I/II clinical trials. In general, knowledge about the genotoxicity of the CNPs allows us to understand and then minimize the potential adverse effects

[20] associated with them, in order to protect human health and the environment.

associated with them, in order to protect human health and the environment.

4. Conclusions

Carbon nanomaterials have found their place in various fields, some of which are electronics, optics, sensorics, and catalysis. Moreover, some of them proved to be potential nanomedicine assets behaving as nanodrug delivery systems, protectors, or bioimaging agents. For this plethora of use, carbon nanomaterials have to thank their physico-chemical properties and chemical functionalization. Despite being promising for the various applications, justified concerns on the impact of carbon nanomaterials have been raised. Research conducted on

Carbon nanomaterials have found their place in various fields, some of which are electronics, optics, sensorics, and catalysis. Moreover, some of them proved to be potential nanomedicine assets behaving as nanodrug delivery systems, protectors, or bioimaging agents. For this plethora of use, carbon nanomaterials have to thank their physico-chemical properties and chemical functionalization. Despite being promising for the various applications, justified concerns on the impact of carbon nanomaterials have been raised. Research conducted on

in vitro

and

in vivo

models has claimed that some members of the carbon nanomaterial family, besides being genotoxic, also proved to induce oxidative damage, inflammation, and activate different cell signalling pathways that can result in different cellular responses. The size distribution, charge, different synthesis methods, and surface modifications play an essential role in deciding the fate of CNMs in

in vivo

systems. Although enormous research has been put into this issue, the real mechanisms of CNM toxicity are still missing, which is the main obstacle for their clinical promotions. Therefore, further research is needed to address the safety concerns over CNM applications. More

in vitro

studies, including biocompatibility assays, studies on ROS formation, and analyses of inflammation and genotoxicity on numerous healthy and transformed cell lines, will contribute to the essential body of work regarding CNM toxicity. Likewise,

in vivo

testing may further help in designing CNMs with desirable properties and high efficiency. Besides the frequently used rodent models, regular introduction of the zebrafish model into this research may improve the field, as this model has emerged as a reliable and powerful vertebrate model. Finally, all the efforts from

in vitro

and

in vivo research will contribute to elucidate CNMs’ biological impacts and to translate scientific research into medical practice, subsequently leading to the full potential of CNMs as drug delivery systems, cancer therapeutics, bioimaging systems, gene delivery systems, etc. In order to let the carbon nanomaterials use outweigh their toxicity effects, these powerful materials first ought to be widely assessed for safety in different conditions, doses, and on numerous models.

research will contribute to elucidate CNMs’ biological impacts and to translate scientific research into medical practice, subsequently leading to the full potential of CNMs as drug delivery systems, cancer therapeutics, bioimaging systems, gene delivery systems, etc. In order to let the carbon nanomaterials use outweigh their toxicity effects, these powerful materials first ought to be widely assessed for safety in different conditions, doses, and on numerous models.

References

  1. Ping-Chang Lin; Stephen Lin; Paul C. Wang; Rajagopalan Sridhar; Techniques for physicochemical characterization of nanomaterials. Biotechnology Advances 2014, 32, 711-726, 10.1016/j.biotechadv.2013.11.006.
  2. Ibrahim Khan; Khalid Saeed; Idrees Khan; Nanoparticles: Properties, applications and toxicities. Arabian Journal of Chemistry 2019, 12, 908-931, 10.1016/j.arabjc.2017.05.011.
  3. Vicki L. Colvin; The potential environmental impact of engineered nanomaterials. Nature Biotechnology 2003, 21, 1166-1170, 10.1038/nbt875.
  4. Aleksandar Djordjevic; R. Injac; Danica Jović; J. Mrdjanovic; Mariana Seke; Bioimpact of Carbon Nanomaterials. Advanced Carbon Materials and Technology 2013, /, 193-271, 10.1002/9781118895399.ch6.
  5. Qiurong Zhang; Meiling Wang; Chuanhui Gu; Chengdong Zhang; Water disinfection processes change the cytotoxicity of C60 fullerene: Reactions at the nano-bio interface. Water Research 2019, 163, 114867, 10.1016/j.watres.2019.114867.
  6. Tingting Du; Adeyemi S. Adeleye; Arturo A. Keller; Zhineng Wu; Wei Han; Yingying Wang; Chengdong Zhang; Yao Li; Photochlorination-induced transformation of graphene oxide: Mechanism and environmental fate. Water Research 2017, 124, 372-380, 10.1016/j.watres.2017.07.054.
  7. Karin Aschberger; Helinor J. Johnston; Vicki Stone; Robert J. Aitken; C. Lang Tran; Steven M. Hankin; Sheona A.K. Peters; Frans M. Christensen; Review of fullerene toxicity and exposure – Appraisal of a human health risk assessment, based on open literature. Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology 2010, 58, 455-473, 10.1016/j.yrtph.2010.08.017.
  8. Helinor J. Johnston; Gary R. Hutchison; Frans M. Christensen; Karin Aschberger; Vicki Stone; The Biological Mechanisms and Physicochemical Characteristics Responsible for Driving Fullerene Toxicity. Toxicological Sciences 2009, 114, 162-182, 10.1093/toxsci/kfp265.
  9. Gregory L. Baker; Amit Gupta; Mark L. Clark; Blandina R. Valenzuela; Lauren M. Staska; Sam J. Harbo; Judy T. Pierce; Jeffery A. Dill; Inhalation Toxicity and Lung Toxicokinetics of C60 Fullerene Nanoparticles and Microparticles. Toxicological Sciences 2007, 101, 122-131, 10.1093/toxsci/kfm243.
  10. Pablo Solís Fernández; Mark A. Bissett; Hiroki Ago; Synthesis, structure and applications of graphene-based 2D heterostructures. Chemical Society Reviews 2017, 46, 4572-4613, 10.1039/c7cs00160f.
  11. Deep Jariwala; Vinod K. Sangwan; Lincoln J. Lauhon; Tobin J. Marks; Mark C. Hersam; Carbon nanomaterials for electronics, optoelectronics, photovoltaics, and sensing. Chemical Society Reviews 2013, 42, 2824-2860, 10.1039/c2cs35335k.
  12. Ilija Rašović; Water-soluble fullerenes for medical applications. Materials Science and Technology 2016, 33, 777-794, 10.1080/02670836.2016.1198114.
  13. Danijela Petrovic; Mariana Seke; Branislava Srdjenovic; Aleksandar Djordjevic; Applications of Anti/Prooxidant Fullerenes in Nanomedicine along with Fullerenes Influence on the Immune System. Journal of Nanomaterials 2015, 2015, 1-11, 10.1155/2015/565638.
  14. Mariana Seke; Danijela Petrovic; Aleksandar Djordjevic; Danica Jović; Milica Labudovic Borovic; Zdenko Kanacki; Milan Jankovic; Fullerenol/doxorubicin nanocomposite mitigates acute oxidative stress and modulates apoptosis in myocardial tissue. Nanotechnology 2016, 27, 485101, 10.1088/0957-4484/27/48/485101.
  15. Danica Jović; Mariana Seke; Aleksandar N. Djordjevic; Jasminka Ž. Mrđanović; Lidija D. Aleksić; Gordana M. Bogdanović; Aleksandar Pavic; Janez Plavec; Fullerenol nanoparticles as a new delivery system for doxorubicin. RSC Advances 2016, 6, 38563-38578, 10.1039/C6RA03879D.
  16. Rasoul Madannejad; Nahid Shoaie; Fatemeh Jahanpeyma; Mohammad Hasan Darvishi; Mostafa Azimzadeh; Hamid Reza Javadi; Toxicity of carbon-based nanomaterials: Reviewing recent reports in medical and biological systems.. Chemico-Biological Interactions 2019, 307, 206-222, 10.1016/j.cbi.2019.04.036.
  17. Jacevic Vesna; Jovic Danica; Kamil Kuca; Viktorija Dragojevic-Simic; Dobric Silva; Trajkovic Sanja; Borisev Ivana; Segrt Zoran; Milovanovic Zoran; Bokonjic Dubravko; et al.Djordjevic AleksandarDragojevic-Simic Viktorija Effects of fullerenol nanoparticles and amifostine on radiation-induced tissue damages: Histopathological analysis. Journal of Applied Biomedicine 2016, 14, 285-297, 10.1016/j.jab.2016.05.004.
  18. Zuzana Magdolenova; Andrew R. Collins; Ashutosh Kumar; Alok Dhawan; Vicki Stone; Maria Dusinska; Mechanisms of genotoxicity. A review ofin vitroandin vivostudies with engineered nanoparticles. Nanotoxicology 2013, 8, 233-278, 10.3109/17435390.2013.773464.
  19. Hadi Samadian; Mohammad Saeid Salami; Mehdi Jaymand; Asaas Azarnezhad; Masoud Najafi; Hamed Barabadi; Amirhossein Ahmadi; Genotoxicity assessment of carbon-based nanomaterials; Have their unique physicochemical properties made them double-edged swords?. Mutation Research/Reviews in Mutation Research 2020, 783, 108296, 10.1016/j.mrrev.2020.108296.
  20. Sekhar Chandra Ray; Nikhil Ranjan Jana; Toxicology and Biosafety of Carbon Nanomaterials. Carbon Nanomaterials for Biological and Medical Applications 2017, /, 205-229, 10.1016/b978-0-323-47906-6.00006-0.
  21. Sekhar Chandra Ray; Nikhil Ranjan Jana; Toxicology and Biosafety of Carbon Nanomaterials. Carbon Nanomaterials for Biological and Medical Applications 2017, /, 205-229, 10.1016/b978-0-323-47906-6.00006-0.
More
© Text is available under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)
Feedback