| Title |
Free Silver Ion as the Main Cause of Acute and Chronic Toxicity of Silver Nanoparticles to Cladocerans
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Archives of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology, October 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00244-014-0091-x |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Masaki Sakamoto, Jin-Yong Ha, Shin Yoneshima, Chisato Kataoka, Haruki Tatsuta, Shosaku Kashiwada |
| Abstract |
We investigated the interspecific variation of silver nanoparticle (SNP) sensitivity in common cladocerans (Daphnia magna, D. galeata, and Bosmina longirostris) and the exact cause of both acute and chronic toxicity focusing on the form of silver (NPs and ions). Materials tested were non-surface-coated silver nanocolloids (SNCs) and AgNO3. The results of the acute toxicity tests support the theory that the effects of SNPs on aquatic organisms is mainly due to Ag(+) released from SNPs. Among the three cladocerans, D. galeata was more sensitive to silver (as Ag(+)) than both D. magna and B. longirostris. Moreover, the chronic toxicity of SNCs was also derived from dissolved silver (especially Ag(+)). SNCs (as total silver concentration) showed far lower chronic compared with acute toxicity to daphnids because the amount of dissolved silver decreased in the presence of prey algae. The chronic end-point values (EC10 values for net reproductive rate and the probability of survival to maturation) did not differ largely from acute ones (48-h EC50 obtained from acute toxicity tests and 48-h LC50 estimated by the biotic ligand model) when the values were calculated based on Ag(+) concentration. The α value (concentration at which intrinsic population growth rate is decreased to zero) estimated by a power function model was a reliable parameter for assessing the chronic toxicity of silver. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 3 | 60% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 20% |
| Unknown | 1 | 20% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 60% |
| Scientists | 1 | 20% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 20% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 60 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 60 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 12 | 20% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 8 | 13% |
| Researcher | 6 | 10% |
| Professor | 4 | 7% |
| Other | 4 | 7% |
| Other | 9 | 15% |
| Unknown | 17 | 28% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Environmental Science | 15 | 25% |
| Chemistry | 9 | 15% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 9 | 15% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 2 | 3% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 3% |
| Other | 2 | 3% |
| Unknown | 21 | 35% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 13 March 2015.
All research outputs
#13,198,635
of 23,806,312 outputs
Outputs from Archives of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology
#1,314
of 2,093 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#117,340
of 262,336 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Archives of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology
#5
of 28 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,806,312 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,093 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.6. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 262,336 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 55% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 28 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its contemporaries.