article · ACS Nano
Metal-organic framework nanoparticles show promise for nanopesticides, yet their biological and environmental safety profiles require examination. Evaluating short- and long-term exposures across five specific nanoparticles revealed distinct toxicity levels in zebrafish, ranking from copper-based frameworks as the most toxic to zirconium-based frameworks as the least toxic. Certain variants, particularly copper- and zinc-based frameworks, caused substantial cellular and tissue damage, including liver swelling, vacuolisation, and mitochondrial degradation in liver and intestinal cells. In addition, all five materials altered gut microbiota composition, with several types significantly increasing bacterial markers associated with intestinal inflammation. Metabolomic analysis showed shifts in arachidonic acid metabolism and significant reductions in key metabolites related to oxidative stress resistance. These results demonstrate that nanoparticle composition strongly influences toxicity, underscoring the need for careful risk evaluation.
As metal-organic frameworks are increasingly explored for agricultural use in nanopesticides, their unintended impacts on aquatic ecosystems pose serious concerns. Demonstrating how different framework compositions damage organ tissue, alter gut microbes, and disrupt metabolism in aquatic models provides critical toxicological baselines. This knowledge helps researchers and environmental bodies identify which chemical formulations pose acceptable versus hazardous profiles prior to widespread release.
The findings are relevant to agrochemical companies and regulatory authorities developing or evaluating metal-organic framework nanopesticides. By identifying which nanoparticle compositions cause severe organ and microbial damage, developers can deprioritise hazardous variants early in product development. This work is early-stage toxicological research, indicating that agricultural commercialisation of these materials requires substantial further safety validation before reaching practical, real-world deployment.
AI-generated from the published abstract. Always read the original work before citing.
Metal-organic framework nanoparticles (MOF NPs) have received much attention for their potential use in nanopesticides. However, little is known about the potential health and environmental risks associated with these materials. In this study, the toxicological responses of zebrafish exposed to five MOF NPs for short and long periods of time were evaluated. The acute toxicity results showed that the toxicity of the five MOF NPs to zebrafish embryos and adult zebrafish was in the order of Cu-MOF > ZIF-90 > ZIF-8 > Fe-MOF > Zr-MOF. Histopathological analysis revealed that ZIF-8, ZIF-90, and Cu-MOF NPs caused liver swelling and vacuolization in zebrafish. The cellular ultrastructure showed that ZIF-8, ZIF-90, and Cu-MOF NPs severely damaged the mitochondrial structure in intestinal epithelial cells and liver cells. The 16S rDNA sequencing data showed that all five MOF NPs significantly altered the dominant microorganisms in the zebrafish intestine. The microbial markers of intestinal inflammation, <i>Proteobacteria</i> (<i>Aeromonas</i>, <i>Plesiomonas</i>, and <i>Legionella</i>), were significantly increased in the Fe-MOF, ZIF-8, Zr-MOF, and Cu-MOF treatment groups. Metabolomics results indicated that the levels of inflammatory promoting factors (Leukotriene E4, 20-hydroxyeicosatetraenoic acid) in arachidonic acid metabolism were decreased, and the levels of inflammatory suppressing factors (8,9-epoxyeicosatrienoic acid) were increased. Metabolites related to oxidative stress, such as glutamine, pyridoxamine, and l-glutamic acid in vitamin B6 metabolism and other signaling pathways, were significantly reduced. Overall, these results suggest that the different MOF NPs had widely varying toxicity to zebrafish, and further attention should be paid to the toxicity of MOF NPs in the real environment.
This page summarises published work. The authoritative version sits with the publisher.
DOI: 10.1021/acsnano.4c03451
Is something wrong with this record? Report it or request removal.
Discussion
Have you built on this work, tried to replicate it, or seen it applied in practice? Share what you know. Verified researchers and MARATTO™ domain experts can open a discussion, and any member can reply. Contributions are reviewed before they appear.
No discussion yet. Open the first thread.
New to MARATTO™? Create a free account.
