Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29456907›Full record

ReviewEnvironmental sciences Europe2018

Nanoparticles in the environment: where do we come from, where do we go to?

Mirco Bundschuh, Juliane Filser, Simon Lüderwald, Moira S McKee, George Metreveli, Gabriele E Schaumann, Ralf Schulz, Stephan Wagner

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Environmental sciences Europe, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 142 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
142citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

142 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Avian PathogenicVeterinary sciences · 2025
    Review
  9. Effects of Nanomaterials on Crops.Current issues in molecular biology · 2025
    Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. The Role ofToxics · 2025
    Review
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. FeMaterials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025
    Article
  19. Review
  20. Review

82 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Mirco Bundschuh1Functional Aquatic Ecotoxicology, Institute for Environmental Sciences, University of Koblenz-Landau, Fortstrasse 7, 76829 Landau, Germany.
Juliane Filser3FB 02, UFT Center for Environmental Research and Sustainable Technology, University of Bremen, Leobener Str. 6, 28359 Bremen, Germany.
Simon Lüderwald4Ecotoxicology and Environment, Institute for Environmental Sciences, University of Koblenz-Landau, Fortstrasse 7, 76829 Landau, Germany.
Moira S McKee3FB 02, UFT Center for Environmental Research and Sustainable Technology, University of Bremen, Leobener Str. 6, 28359 Bremen, Germany.
George Metreveli5Environmental and Soil Chemistry, Institute for Environmental Sciences, University of Koblenz-Landau, Fortstrasse 7, 76829 Landau, Germany.
Gabriele E Schaumann5Environmental and Soil Chemistry, Institute for Environmental Sciences, University of Koblenz-Landau, Fortstrasse 7, 76829 Landau, Germany.
Ralf Schulz4Ecotoxicology and Environment, Institute for Environmental Sciences, University of Koblenz-Landau, Fortstrasse 7, 76829 Landau, Germany.
Stephan Wagner6Department of Analytical Chemistry, Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research-UfZ, Permoserstrasse 15, 04318 Leipzig, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Nanoparticles serve various industrial and domestic purposes which is reflected in their steadily increasing production volume. This economic success comes along with their presence in the environment and the risk of potentially adverse effects in natural systems. Over the last decade, substantial progress regarding the understanding of sources, fate, and effects of nanoparticles has been made. Predictions of environmental concentrations based on modelling approaches could recently be confirmed by measured concentrations in the field. Nonetheless, analytical techniques are, as covered elsewhere, still under development to more efficiently and reliably characterize and quantify nanoparticles, as well as to detect them in complex environmental matrixes. Simultaneously, the effects of nanoparticles on aquatic and terrestrial systems have received increasing attention. While the debate on the relevance of nanoparticle-released metal ions for their toxicity is still ongoing, it is a re-occurring phenomenon that inert nanoparticles are able to interact with biota through physical pathways such as biological surface coating. This among others interferes with the growth and behaviour of exposed organisms. Moreover, co-occurring contaminants interact with nanoparticles. There is multiple evidence suggesting nanoparticles as a sink for organic and inorganic co-contaminants. On the other hand, in the presence of nanoparticles, repeatedly an elevated effect on the test species induced by the co-contaminants has been reported. In this paper, we highlight recent achievements in the field of nano-ecotoxicology in both aquatic and terrestrial systems but also refer to substantial gaps that require further attention in the future.

Indexed as

Co-contaminantsEnvironmental parametersFateNanomaterialsReview

Identifiers

PMID29456907
PMCPMC5803285

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.