Nanomaterial Probes in the Environment: Gold Nanoparticle Soil

Subscriber access provided by READING UNIV

Article

Nanomaterial Probes in the Environment: Gold Nanoparticle Soil Retention and Environmental Stability as a Function of Surface Chemistry Samuel E. Lohse, Nardine Abadeer, Michael Zoloty, Jason C. White, Lee A. Newman, and Catherine J. Murphy ACS Sustainable Chem. Eng., Just Accepted Manuscript • DOI: 10.1021/ acssuschemeng.7b02622 • Publication Date (Web): 25 Oct 2017 Downloaded from http://pubs.acs.org on November 2, 2017

Just Accepted “Just Accepted” manuscripts have been peer-reviewed and accepted for publication. They are posted online prior to technical editing, formatting for publication and author proofing. The American Chemical Society provides “Just Accepted” as a free service to the research community to expedite the dissemination of scientific material as soon as possible after acceptance. “Just Accepted” manuscripts appear in full in PDF format accompanied by an HTML abstract. “Just Accepted” manuscripts have been fully peer reviewed, but should not be considered the official version of record. They are accessible to all readers and citable by the Digital Object Identifier (DOI®). “Just Accepted” is an optional service offered to authors. Therefore, the “Just Accepted” Web site may not include all articles that will be published in the journal. After a manuscript is technically edited and formatted, it will be removed from the “Just Accepted” Web site and published as an ASAP article. Note that technical editing may introduce minor changes to the manuscript text and/or graphics which could affect content, and all legal disclaimers and ethical guidelines that apply to the journal pertain. ACS cannot be held responsible for errors or consequences arising from the use of information contained in these “Just Accepted” manuscripts.

ACS Sustainable Chemistry & Engineering is published by the American Chemical Society. 1155 Sixteenth Street N.W., Washington, DC 20036 Published by American Chemical Society. Copyright © American Chemical Society. However, no copyright claim is made to original U.S. Government works, or works produced by employees of any Commonwealth realm Crown government in the course of their duties.

Page 1 of 30

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

ACS Sustainable Chemistry & Engineering

Nanomaterial Probes in the Environment: Gold Nanoparticle Soil Retention and Environmental Stability as a Function of Surface Chemistry Samuel E. Lohse; 1,2* Nardine S. Abadeer; 1 Michael Zoloty; 1 Jason C. White;3 Lee A. Newman;4 Catherine J. Murphy1* 1

Department of Chemistry, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, 600 S Mathews Ave.

Urbana, IL, 61801 2

Department of Chemistry, Physical and Environmental Sciences, Colorado Mesa University,

1100 North Ave Grand Junction, CO, 81501 3

Department of Analytical Chemistry, The Connecticut Agricultural Experiment Station, 123

Huntington St New Haven, CT, 06504 4

Department of Environmental and Forest Biology, State University of New York-Syracuse, 1

Forestry Dr., Syracuse, NY, 13210 *To whom correspondence should be addressed: CJM: [email protected], 217-333-7680; SEL: [email protected]; 970-248-1590

Keywords: engineered nanoparticles, aggregation, homoaggregation, nanomaterial contaminants, environmental mobility

1 ACS Paragon Plus Environment


1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

ABSTRACT The increased prevalence of functionalized nanomaterials in a range of applications will inevitably lead to nanoparticle contamination of soil and groundwater. Here, we investigate how gold nanoparticles’ (AuNPs) shape and surface chemistry influence their retention in soil columns and stability in simulated groundwater. When AuNPs are eluted from soil columns with simulated groundwater, spherical particles are more strongly retained in the soil than the rodshaped AuNPs, regardless of the surface chemistry (as determined by ICP-OES). In a deionized water eluent, however, the same AuNPs showed a retention profile dependent upon surface chemistry (positively-charged AuNPs are strongly retained by soil, while negatively-charged particles are quickly eluted). This change in retention behavior suggests that the spherical AuNPs may undergo a physiochemical transformation (likely aggregation)during the elution process which reduces their mobility AuNP stability against aggregation in simulated groundwater was investigated using absorbance spectroscopy and dynamic light scattering. We find that AuNP surface chemistry has a strong influence on AuNP stability against homoaggregation in simulated groundwater. The stability of the AuNPs depends primarily on the nature of the interaction between the AuNP surface and the capping agent (not simply the ligand charge). AuNPs protected with relatively labile capping agents are more susceptible to irreversible homoaggregation in groundwater than polyelectrolyte-coated AuNPs. However, in the presence of alginate, the AuNPs form heteroaggregates with the alginate polymers, regardless of the initial AuNP surface coating.


Page 2 of 30

Page 3 of 30

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60


INTRODUCTION The prevalence of nanomaterials in commercial products continues to increase.1,2 Over the past two decades, billions of dollars have been invested in research and development for nanomaterial-enabled consumer products, in areas such as skin care,3 sporting goods,4 industrial catalysis,5 antimicrobials,6 and cancer therapeutics.1-7 As nanomaterials proliferate in consumer products, the amount of engineered nanomaterials present in the environment will inevitably increase.8,9 Accordingly, in order to inform future regulations on nanomaterial-enabled products and accurately estimate the environmental risk functionalized nanomaterials pose, the connection between nanomaterial properties and their environmental fate and transport must be investigated.10,11 Functionalized nanomaterials represent a unique class of environmental contaminants, because they exist in a size regime (~1-200 nm) that is much closer to the colloidal materials making up naturally occurring sediment12 than typical chemical contaminants. Engineered nanomaterials’ environmental interactions should therefore be governed by some combination of their physiochemical properties (size, shape, and surface chemistry). Prior to developing risk assessment profiles for any engineered nanomaterials released, we must first develop an understanding of how mobile nanomaterials are within different environmental matrices, how their mobility can be connected to their structure and composition, and how long they retain their original physiochemical properties.13,14 The behavior of functionalized gold nanoparticles (AuNPs) within different environmental matrices is of particular interest for three reasons. First, AuNPs are easier to track through environmental media than other NPs, being relatively stable against oxidation,15 easy to track and characterize,16 and gold occurs at an extremely low background level in most



1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

environments.17 Second, the physiochemical properties (size, shape,18 and surface chemistry19) of AuNPs can be controlled in exquisite detail. This allows the fate and transport of AuNPs in the environment to be closely correlated with material properties. Finally, because AuNPs are being investigated for use in biomedical applications,7 we can expect an increase in the prevalence of AuNPs in the environment. To date, there have been several limited studies investigating the environmental fate of gold nanomaterials.20, 21,22,

23

By systematically varying nanomaterial characteristics, as well as

the chosen environmental medium, we can gain an improved understanding of the implications of nanomaterial exposure to the environment. Here, we prepared a library of functionalized AuNPs containing spherical citrate (Cit) and cetyltrimethylammonium bromide (CTAB)stabilized AuNPs, as well as CTAB, sodium polyacrylate (PAA), and polyallylamine hydrochloride (PAH)-stabilized gold nanorods. We used these AuNPs probes to examine the mobility of functionalized AuNPs in two types of soils (an agricultural and a residential sample) and alginate as a function of AuNP shape and surface chemistry. We also investigated how the physiochemical properties of the AuNPs change as a result of groundwater, alginate, or soil exposure. The polysaccharide alginate is secreted by organisms such as brown algae,24 seaweed,25 and bacteria such as Pseudomonas aeruginosa26 and Azotobacter vinelandii27 during formation of bacterial biofilms. Thus, alginate is a useful matrix to investigate interactions between nanomaterials and natural organic matter.

MATERIALS AND METHODS Materials. All materials were used as received, unless otherwise noted. Soil samples were obtained from field sites in Connecticut, dried and characterized (Supporting Information,


Page 4 of 30

Page 5 of 30

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60


Table S1, Figures S1, S2). Gold tetrachloroaurate trihydrate (HAuCl4 •3H2O), sodium borohydride (NaBH4), ascorbic acid (C6H8O6), sodium polyacrylate (PAA, 30 wt.% solution, 15 000 MW), polyallylamine hydrochloride (PAH, 17 500 MW), alginic acid (sodium salt), and silver nitrate (AgNO3), hexadecyltrimethylammonium bromide (CTAB), L-ascorbic acid, sodium chloride (NaCl), and trisodium citrate (Cit, Na3C6H5O7) were obtained from Sigma Aldrich. Calcium chloride dihydrate (CaCl2 •2H2O) and magnesium chloride hexahydrate (MgCl2 •6H2O) were obtained from Fisher. Sodium chloride was obtained from EMD Millipore. Deionized water (18.2 MΩ) was prepared using a Barnstead NANOPURE water filter. Unless otherwise noted, all nanomaterial syntheses and subsequent experiments were carried out using Nanopure deionized water. Transmission electron microscopy (TEM) grids (SiO on copper mesh, PELCO) were used for electron microscopy studies. Standard laboratory chromatography sand was obtained from Aldrich. Synthesis of Functionalized Gold Nanoparticles (AuNPs). AuNPs were synthesized and functionalized according to previously reported methods.28,29,30,31,32,33,34 Details of the NP synthesis and functionalization procedures are provided in the Supporting Information. Diagrams and TEM images of the functionalized AuNP probes used in these studies are shown in Figure 1.



1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

Page 6 of 30

Figure 1. The functionalized AuNP library. (a) Diagrams of the AuNPs and ligands used for functionalization. (b) Chemical structures of nanoparticle ligands. (c) TEM images of 15 nm Cit AuNPs, 15 nm CTAB AuNPs, and CTAB AuNRs.

Nanoparticle Characterization. AuNPs were characterized using a combination of UV-vis absorbance spectroscopy (Varian Cary 500 UV-VIS-NIR Spectrophotometer), transmission electron microscopy (JEOL 2100 TEM), and dynamic light scattering (DLS)/ζ-potential (Brookhaven ZetaPALS). For TEM analysis, dilute AuNP solutions were drop-cast onto TEM grids. DLS and ζ-potential data for the as-synthesized AuNPs were obtained from solutions dispersed in deionized water (pH = 8.08) at a concentration of 1.0 nM for Au nanorods and 5.0 nM for spherical AuNPs. AuNP concentrations were determined using absorbance spectroscopy,


Page 7 of 30

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60


according to previously reported methods.35,36,37 Inductively coupled plasma emission spectroscopy (ICP-OES) analysis of the digested soil columns was performed using a PerkinElmer Optima 2000 ICP-OES (λem = 268 nm). Complete physiochemical characterization of the AuNPs can be found in the Supporting Information. AuNP Retention in Soil and Alginate Columns. The retention of functionalized AuNPs in the soil samples and alginate hydrogels was studied by constructing columns which were similar to chromatography columns described by Tripathi et al.38 The columns contained two different layers; either soil:sand (1:5 w:w) or an alginate hydrogel and sand (Figure S3). Aqueous liquid alginate was made in 2 wt.% and the solution was stirred overnight. Alginate hydrogels were formed by adding 3 mL of 0.1 M CaCl2 to 15 mL of liquid alginate.23,39 The gels were allowed to crosslink for 15 minutes, and then were rinsed with water before being placed in the columns. Images of the alginate hydrogels are provided in the Supporting Information (Figure S4 and S5). For soil column retention experiments, 2.0 mL of a 5.0 nM spherical AuNP solution (or 2.0 mL of 1.0 nM Au nanorod solution) was added to the column, and allowed to settle into the soil for twenty minutes prior to elution. The functionalized AuNPs were eluted using either Nanopure or simulated groundwater (2.5/2.5 ppm Ca2+/Mg2+) in separate experiments. Elution continued until AuNPs were observed (by absorbance spectroscopy) to have escaped the soil column, or until 300 mL of eluent had passed through the column. The maximum elution time for any of the AuNPs in the soil columns was ~ 24 hours. The percent of gold nanoparticles retained in the columns was determined by UV-vis absorbance spectroscopy of the eluent (if the AuNPs showed no signs of aggregation after elution, i.e. if the AuNPs were eluted with nanopure deionized water). However, if the AuNPs aggregated during elution, nanoparticle concentration



1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

was quantified using ICP-OES analysis of the digested soil samples. A comparison of AuNP quantitation by absorbance spectroscopy versus ICP analysis can be found in the Supporting Information. Prior to ICP analysis, soil samples were digested in boiling aqua regia (Caution: corrosive, strong oxidizer!) for three hours. After digestion was complete, the resulting solution was gravity-filtered, and diluted to a final concentration of 10% aqua regia with deionized water. Prior to analysis, the solution was further filtered with a 0.450 µm filter. For alginate column retention experiments, the column was hydrated with deionized water. Then, 2 mL of a 0.5 nM AuNP solution were loaded into the column. The AuNPs were allowed to diffuse through until they were at the top of the sand layer, then 30 mL of deionized water was added above the sand. Two fractions of eluent (15 mL) were collected. Another 10 mL of water was added above the sand and a 13 mL fraction was collected. Absorbance spectroscopy analysis of the eluent was used to determine the percent of AuNPs that were transported through the column. Full details of column construction and analytical procedures can be found in the Supporting Information (Figure S3 and S6). AuNP Stability in Simulated Environmental Conditions. The stability of AuNPs against aggregation was investigated under three different environmental conditions: incubation in simulated groundwater (2.5/2.5 ppm Ca2+/Mg2+), simulated groundwater in the presence of alginic acid (1.0 mg/L and 600 mg/L sodium alginate), and immersion in an aqueous slurry of soil (1.0 g of soil in 5.0 mL of deionized water). The stability of the AuNPs in each of these media was assessed at a [AuNP] = 1.0 nM for the spherical AuNPs, and 0.20 nM for the gold nanorods, so that all samples would have an absorbance of 1 at their wavelength maximum. The aggregation state of the AuNPs was monitored using a combination of UV-vis absorbance spectroscopy and DLS. The stability of the AuNPs was monitored over a 48 or 72 h period,


Page 8 of 30

Page 9 of 30

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60


depending on the relative rate of aggregation that was observed. The experimental setup for these experiments is diagrammed in the Supporting Information (Figure S3). RESULTS AND DISCUSSION Preparation and Characterization of the AuNP Library. We synthesized a library of functionalized AuNPs that possessed various sizes, shapes and surface chemistries, and used these NP probes to investigate the mobility of functionalized NPs in soil and alginate biofilms. The library included 15 nm spherical AuNPs protected with labile capping agents possessing both positive (CTAB) and negative (citrate) charges (though we note that citrate has recently been shown to act as a chelate on the AuNP surface, and may only be truly labile under specific solution conditions).

40,41,42,43,44,45

In addition, the library contained AuNRs (aspect ratio ~4)

coated with CTAB, PAA, and PAH. This provided AuNRs with both positive and negative surface charges, and coated with both labile (monomeric) and non-labile (electrostatically adsorbed polymer) capping agents. We have previously investigated the transport of several of the gold nanorods included in this library in estuary mesocosms, including the CTAB and PAA AuNRs.46,47 Following purification, the AuNPs’ physiochemical properties were characterized using UV-vis, TEM, Zeta-potential, and DLS (Figure 1, Table S2).

AuNP Retention in Soil and Alginate Columns (Deionized Water Eluent). NP transport and retention, through columns containing environmental media, has been demonstrated to be a useful method to examine nanoparticle fate in the environment.35,48,49 Our previous studies in estuary mesocosms, showed that CTAB-AuNRs and PAA-AuNRs partition into different organismal, sediment, and biofilm compartments.43,44 Therefore, we sought to understand how the physiochemical properties of AuNPs influence their retention in two types of soil (Lockwood



1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

Page 10 of 30

Farm and Chlordane Residential) and in alginate biofilms. For these studies, the relevant soil samples or biofilms were combined with white quartz sand, and packed into chromatography columns. AuNP solutions were then applied to the top of the column, and eluted with deionized water (Figures S3). UV-vis absorbance spectroscopy was used to quantify the amount of AuNPs that had eluted from a given soil column. It quickly became evident that the positively-charged AuNPs were strongly retained in columns prepared from either soil sample type (Supporting Information, Figures S7-S10 ). In fact, in the Lockwood Farm soil column, none of the positively-charged AuNPs (15 nm CTAB AuNPs, CTAB AuNRs, and PAH AuNRs) were observed to exit their soil columns (Figure S7a). In contrast, the Cit AuNPs, and the PAA AuNRs were quickly eluted from the soil columns. The same general trend was observed in the Chlordane Residential soil, except that the positively-charged AuNPs were not completely retained by this soil type. While the difference in AuNP retention between the Lockwood and the Chlordane Residential soil was statistically significant for several AuNP samples (particularly the Cit-AuNPs and the PAH-AuNRs), the general trends in AuNP retention appear very similar. It is likely that the positively-charged AuNPs are strongly retained in these soil types due to the strong interaction between the positively-charged particles and the silicates and aluminates present in the soil (although natural organic matter [NOM] may also play a role in this regard). In order to visually verify that AuNP transport through soil columns obeyed basic electrostatics, we also examined AuNP transport through Celite columns (Supporting Information, Figure S8, S9). Because the diatomaceous earth is white, it is possible to directly observe the movement of the AuNPs down the entire length of these columns. The Cit AuNPs eluted quickly through the


Page 11 of 30

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60


column, but the positively-charged CTAB-AuNRs hardly moved from the top of the Celite column, despite extensive elution. To further verify that positively-charged AuNPs had greater affinity for the soil samples, we incubated solutions of the AuNP probes in soil samples that were slurried in deionized water. The sorption of the AuNPs to the colloidal soil components was qualitatively monitored using UV-vis absorbance spectroscopy. When the AuNP samples were incubated with the soil slurries, we again observed that positively-charged AuNPs were strongly sorbed (Supporting Information, Figure S11-S17), while the negatively-charged AuNPs (Cit, PAA) did not adsorb strongly to either soil type. We therefore conclude that the relative immobility of the positivelycharged AuNPs in the soil columns is governed by the electrostatic interactions between the AuNP capping agents and negatively-charged colloidal material in the soil. Similar transport experiments through columns containing alginate hydrogels were carried out. The amount of AuNPs retained by these columns was again determined by absorbance spectroscopy analysis of the eluents (Supporting Information, Figure S7c and S10). The results from the transport experiments are shown in Figure S7c. Generally, AuNP retention in alginate was lower than in the soil columns; however, the trends across shape and surface chemistry are similar. This result demonstrates that the surface charge on AuNPs greatly influences interactions with environmental matrices, as expected. However, there were also differences in retention by shape and surface coating. For example, the PAH AuNRs had reduced retention compared to both the CTAB AuNPs and the CTAB AuNRs. These differences suggest that many nanomaterial characteristics (e.g. size, shape, and surface chemistry) can potentially influence the fate and mobility of AuNPs in the environment.



1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

Page 12 of 30

AuNP Retention in Soil Columns (Simulated Groundwater Eluent). Elution with nanopure deionized water provided some basic insights into the mobility of our functionalized AuNPs within soil samples and biofilms. However, engineered NPs in the environment are more likely to be carried through soil by rainwater or groundwater, which have measurable ionic strengths. In order to better mimic AuNP transport through soil by groundwater, we repeated the soil column retention experiment, but changed the eluent to a simulated groundwater solution (2.5/2.5 ppm Ca2+/Mg2+). AuNP aggregation during elution is more likely at higher ionic strengths (e.g.- in the simulated groundwater). Since any AuNP aggregation prevents accurate quantitation by absorbance spectroscopy, the total amount of Au present in the soil column following elution was determined using ICP-OES. Post-elution, the soil column was removed and digested in boiling aqua regia. The total amount of Au retained in the soil was then determined by ICPOES. The quantity of Au retained in the soil columns as a function of AuNP shape and surface chemistry is shown in Figure 2. Unlike the retention studies with Nanopure water as the eluent, there was a clear difference in the retention profiles between the spherical and the rod-shaped AuNPs in both the Lockwood Farm and Chlordane Residential soil samples. In these trials, spherical AuNPs were more strongly retained (~ 30% retention for both the Cit and CTAB AuNPs) in the soil columns than the AuNRs (~ 7% retention), regardless of the particle’s surface charge. Overall, the particles were far more mobile in the soil columns when simulated groundwater was the eluent, compared to nanopure water (Figure S7 vs Figure 2). Previous studies have indicated that metal NPs are more mobile in soil in lower ionic strength eluents, but these studies were primarily performed using particles stabilized with non-ionic surfactants.50,51 Furthermore, particle mobility in the nanopure water eluent was quantified using absorbance


Page 13 of 30

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60


spectroscopy, rather than ICP-OES; as such, we suggest caution when directly comparing the retention of the AuNPs in detail between the two eluents.

Figure 2. Percent AuNPs retained by mass in soil columns, following elution with. 2.5/2.5 ppm Ca2+/Mg2+, as determined by ICP-OES. (a) Lockwood Farm soil, and (b) Chlordane residential soil. It seems surprising that the shape of the AuNP should have such an effect on their soil retention, in this case. The rod-shaped AuNPs have a transverse axis which is comparable in diameter to the width of the spherical AuNPs (~ 15 nm). Therefore, we would expect that the shape of the particles should have little effect on their mobility, and that the AuNP mobility should still be governed primarily by surface charge. Thus, it seems that in simulated groundwater, the retention of the AuNPs in the soil columns is governed by more than the original size and surface charge of the particles. We hypothesized that the AuNPs might be undergoing some physiochemical changes (likely aggregation) during the elution process that reduced the mobility of the spherical AuNPs.



1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

Page 14 of 30

It is now recognized that nanoparticles (such as AuNPs) that are resistant to oxidative dissolution under typical environmental conditions can undergo significant physiochemical changes (e.g.- homoaggregation, coating by proteins, or heteroaggregation with naturally occurring colloids).52,53 In order to better understand the results of our soil column studies, we chose to investigate possible changes in the AuNPs’ morphology, surface charge, and aggregation state when the AuNPs were exposed to simulated groundwater. The interaction of the AuNPs with the soil samples alone did not appear to produce physiochemical changes that would enhance AuNP retention in the soil (vide supra), so we focused specifically on physiochemical changes the AuNPs might experience when they were dispersed in groundwater, and dispersed in simulated groundwater containing alginic acid. AuNP Stability in Simulated Groundwater. In order to determine how the physiochemical properties of AuNPs might change when they are dispersed in groundwater, the functionalized AuNPs were incubated in a solution of 2.5/2.5 ppm Ca2+/Mg2+. The physiochemical state of the AuNPs was monitored for a 48 h incubation period (the longest elution times in the soil column studies were ~ 24 h). Both UV-vis absorbance spectroscopy and DLS measurements indicated that the Cit AuNPs and CTAB AuNPs completely aggregated within several hours of being dispersed in groundwater (as indicated by a loss of the surface plasmon absorbance features and a rapid increase in the hydrodynamic diameter (Figure 3, Supporting Information, [Table S3]). This aggregation appears to be irreversible, as the aggregated Cit AuNPs and CTAB AuNPs could not be re-suspended by sonicating the solution. TEM images of the resulting aggregates were also obtained (Figure 3). The TEM images of the spherical AuNPs (CTAB and Cit AuNPs) show that the AuNPs appear to have aggregated and fused, forming extended54 networks of larger particles or amorphous nanostructures (Figure 3 a,b). Similar irreversible


Page 15 of 30

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60


aggregation of Cit AuNPs and AgNPs in moderately hard water containing calcium ions has been reported.55,56, Interestingly, the CTAB-AuNPs only aggregated in simulated groundwater if the AuNP samples had been purified twice by centrifugation and washing; if the CTAB-AuNP samples had only been centrifuged once, they showed high stability against aggregation (Supporting Info, Figure S18).



1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

Page 16 of 30

Figure 3. UV-vis absorbance spectra and TEM images of functionalized AuNPs exposed to simulated groundwater (2.5/2.5 ppm Ca2+/Mg2+). (a) 15 nm Cit AuNPs, (b) 15 nm CTAB AuNPs, (c) CTAB AuNRs, (d) PAA AuNRs, and (e) PAH AuNRs. 16 ACS Paragon Plus Environment

Page 17 of 30

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60


In contrast to the spherical AuNPs, while the CTAB and PAA AuNRs show some loss of stability in simulated groundwater, the aggregation was far less, as indicated by UV-vis and DLS, compared to the Cit-AuNPs and CTAB AuNPs (Figure 3). The PAH AuNRs show little evidence of aggregation over the same time period. Similarly, the hydrodynamic diameter of the nanorods show relatively minor increases over the 48 h incubation period, when compared to the spherical AuNPs (Table S3). Aggregation is slow in these samples for both the polyelectrolytecoated rods (which are stabilized by multiple electrostatic interactions with the AuNR surface) and for the CTAB AuNRs (labile ligand). We note that the surface chemistry of the CTAB AuNRs is not directly analogous to the spherical CTAB-AuNPs. The surface of the CTAB AuNRs contains small amounts of adsorbed silver, bromide ions, and at least a double layer of CTAB around the particle surface with a possibly larger density of ligands on the sides of the rods compared to ends/spheres.57 This may explain why they are much slower to aggregate, in spite of the fact that they are stabilized by a relatively labile capping agent. We were able to redisperse the CTAB AuNRs using sonication, consistent with the TEM images showing intact nanorods after the aggregation event. These observations indicate that even nanomaterials that are relatively stable against oxidation16,43,44 may be susceptible to physiochemical transformations (once dispersed in groundwater) that will substantially alter their size and shape due to aggregation (likely coupled with capping agents being released from the nanoparticle surface). The stability of the nanomaterials in environmental media therefore likely depends not only on the core material, but also on the surface chemistry. In this case, it is the chemical nature of the interaction between the capping agent and the nanomaterial surface, rather than the NP’s surface charge, which appears to determine the NP’s stability. The rapid aggregation of the Cit AuNPs and the CTAB AuNPs in



1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

Page 18 of 30

groundwater is consistent with the fact that these spherical AuNPs were more strongly retained in our soil columns than the rod-shaped gold nanoparticles. The large aggregates may be physically trapped in the soil columns, and are therefore relatively immobile compared to the AuNRs. AuNP Stability in Simulated Groundwater Containing Alginic Acid. In addition to dissolved ions, most natural water sources contain some source of NOM, whether it be algae, humic acid, or other material. The presence of NOM in natural waters can reduce functionalized NP aggregation, depending on the pH and ionic strength of the solution.23,58 NOM may adsorb to the surface of the NP, stabilizing against aggregation, or may surround the NPs, linking the particles together in larger heteroaggregate structures.59 Accordingly, we explored whether the addition of NOM (in the form of alginic acid) might mediate the AuNP aggregation we observed in the simulated groundwater. The effect of alginate on AuNP aggregation in simulated groundwater was investigated using the same experimental setup as the groundwater stability studies, with the only difference being the addition of alginic acid at either 1 ppm or 600 ppm. Absorbance spectroscopy measurements indicated that the rate of aggregation was slowed in the presence of alginate for all of the AuNPs tested, and at both alginate concentrations (Supporting Information, Figures S19and S20). Despite this, DLS measurements indicated an increase in the hydrodynamic diameter of the particles in the 600 ppm alginate solution. Furthermore, regardless of the initial surface charge, the ζ-potentials of all the AuNPs were altered following immersion in the solution, and became largely negative, similar to the ζ-potential of the alginate itself (Table S4). TEM images of the AuNP-alginate heteroaggregates show long chains of connected particles possessing a thin, transparent film (the alginate) around the AuNPs. These data suggest that at


Page 19 of 30

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60


least some of the AuNPs form heteroaggregates with the alginate polymer; however, the nature of this heteroaggregation process is not clear. It is possible that alginate monomers adsorb to the AuNP surfaces first, and then alginate cross-links the already alginate-coated AuNPs by polymerization. Alternatively, alginate polymerization could occur first, and then the AuNPs could aggregate with the alginate polymer.60 Nevertheless, for the CTAB and PAH AuNRs, the heteroaggregation process can be observed in real time; visible flocculates are quickly seen to form when these AuNPs are immersed in either the 1 ppm or the 600 ppm alginate solutions (Supp Info, Figure S21). Functionalized AuNPs are typically considered to be stable, particularly compared to silver NPs or metal oxide NPs (readily oxidized or sulfidized) under environmental conditions.10,13,14 However, we find that AuNPs stabilized with labile ligands are susceptible to irreversible aggregation in simulated groundwater, quickly giving rise to large nanowires or aggregate structures rather than individual AuNPs. This is an important consideration, as the majority of previous studies that have examined AuNP fate and transport in mesocosms or uptake into plants have used citrate-stabilized or CTAB-stabilized AuNPs.22,51,61 The rapid aggregation of these AuNPs may have a significant impact on how the AuNPs partition in the environment, including how they biomagnify within the food chain. This rapid aggregation may also have significant consequences for AuNPs that are used in ecotoxicity studies involving typical indicator organisms (e.g., Daphnia or zebrafish).45,62,63 ,

CONCLUSIONS In this study, we examined the mobility of functionalized AuNPs in soil columns and alginate biofilms, and characterized the physiochemical transformations these AuNP probes



1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

Page 20 of 30

undergo under typical environmental conditions. We find that the mobility of functionalized AuNPs in soil or alginate when the eluent is deionized water is well-predicted by considering the electrostatic interactions of the AuNP probes with the primary components of soil and alginate. Positively-charged AuNPs are strongly retained by both soil and alginate biofilms, whereas negatively-charged AuNPs remain relatively mobile. However, when simulated groundwater is the eluent, rod-shaped AuNPs are more mobile in the soil columns than the spherical AuNPs, regardless of the AuNP’s surface charge. Analysis of the physiochemical transformations that the AuNP probes undergo in groundwater indicate that spherical AuNPs stabilized with labile ligands (e.g. citrate or CTAB) aggregate irreversibly, potentially reducing their environmental mobility. In contrast, polymerwrapped AuNPs resist irreversible aggregation for a much longer time period, and remain more mobile in our soil columns (though our study does not necessarily point to a direct causal link between these two phenomena). Furthermore, all the AuNPs tested form large heteroaggregates with aqueous alginate in the presence of free alginic acid. These results suggest that for many AuNP probes, their movement through different ecosystem compartments might be better considered as the movement of large hetero-aggregate species, rather than as individual nanoparticles. ASSOCIATED CONTENT The Supporting Information is available free of charge on the ACS Publications website at DOI:, Supplementary methods, data, and discussion, including additional soil characterization data, nanoparticle synthesis and characterization data, as well as additional data from the incubation trials (PDF). AUTHOR INFORMATION


Page 21 of 30

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60


Corresponding authors: *e-mail: CJM: [email protected], phone: 217-333-7680 ORCID: Catherine J. Murphy: 0000-0001-7066-5575 *e-mail: SEL: [email protected], phone: 970-248-1590 ORCID: Samuel E. Lohse: 000-0002-5388-6322 The authors declare no competing financial interest. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS. This material is based in part upon work supported by the National Science Foundation under the Center for Sustainable Nanotechnology, CHE-1503408. The authors would like to acknowledge the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign’s Microanalysis Facility for assistance with the ICP-OES analysis. N.S.A acknowledges funding from the National Science Foundation Graduate Research Fellowship Program under Grant DGE-1144245. The authors would also like to acknowledge Colorado Mesa University for funding and instrumental assistance.

REFERENCES 1

Stark, W. J.; Stoessel, P. R.; Wohlleben, W.; Hafner, A. Industrial Applications of Nanoparticles. Chem. Soc. Rev. 2015, 44, 5793-5805. DOI: 10.1039/C4CS00362D

2

Siegel, R. W.; Hu, Evelyn; Cox, D.M.; Goronkin, H.; Jelinski, L. et al.. Nanostructure Science and Technology: R & D Status and Trends in Nanoparticles, Nanostructured Materials and Nanodevices. Siegel, R.W.; Hu, E., Eds. Springer Science & Business Media. 1999.

3

Schäfer-Korting, M.; Mehnert, W.; Korting, H.-C. Lipid Nanoparticles for Improved Topical Application of Drugs for Skin Diseases. Adv. Drug Delivery Rev. 2007, 59, 427-443. DOI:10.1016/j.addr.2007.04.006



1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

4

Smith, A. Does it Have a Sporting Chance? Chem. Int. 2006, 28, 8-9.

5

Bell, A. T. The Impact of Nanoscience on Heterogeneous Catalysis. Science 2003, 299, 16881691. DOI: 10.1126/science.1083671

6

Rai, M.; Yadav, A.; Gade, A. Silver Nanoparticles as a New Generation of Antimicrobials. Biotechnol. Adv. 2009, 27, 76-83. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biotechadv.2008.09.002

7

Brannon-Peppas, L; Blanchette, J. O. Nanoparticles and Targeted Systems for Cancer Therapy. Adv. Drug Delivery Rev. 2012, 64, 206-212. DOI:10.1016/j.addr.2004.02.014

8

Rochman, C. M.; Kross, S. M.; Armstrong, J. B.; Bogan, M. T.; Darling, E. S.; Green, S. J.; Smyth, A. R.; Veríssimo, D. Scientific Evidence Supports a Ban on Microbeads. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2015, 49, 10759-10761. DOI: 10.1021/acs.est.5b03909

9

Rudd, J. Regulating the Impacts of Engineered Nanoparticles under TSCA: Shifting Authority from Industry to Government. J. Envtl. L. 2008, 33, 215-282.

10

Wiesner, M. R.; Lowry, G. V.; Jones, K. L. Hochella, M. f.; Di Giulio R. T.; Casman, E.; Bernhardt, E. S. Decreasing Uncertainties in Assessing Environmental Exposure, Risk, and Ecological Implications of Nanomaterials. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2009, 43, 64586462. DOI: 10.1021/es803621k

11

Godwin, H. A.; Chopra, K.; Bradley, K. A.; Cohen, Y.; Harthorn, B. H.; Hoek, E. M. V.; Holden, P.; Keller, A. A.; Lenihan, H. S.; Nisbet, R. M.; Nel, A. E. The University of California Center for the Environmental Implications of Nanotechnology. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2009, 43, 6453-6457. DOI: 10.1021/es8034544

12

Gimbert, L. J.; Haygarth, P. M.; Beckett, R.; Worsfold, P. J. Comparison of Centrifugation and Filtration Techniques for the Size Fractionation of Colloidal Material in Soil Suspensions


Page 22 of 30

Page 23 of 30

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60


Using Sedimentation Field-Flow Fractionation. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2005, 39, 17311735. DOI: 10.1021/es049230u 13

Dale, A. L.; Casman, E. A.; Lowry, G. V.; Lead, J. R.; Viparelli, E.; Baalousha, M. Modeling Nanomaterial Environmental Fate in Aquatic Systems. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2015, 49, 2587-2593. DOI: 10.1021/es505076w

14

Lowry, G. V.; Gregory, K. B.; Apte, S. C.; Lead, J. R. Transformations of Nanomaterials in the Environment. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2012, 46, 6893-6899. DOI: 10.1021/es300839e

15

Pina, C. D.; Falletta, E.; Prati, L.; Rossi, M. Selective Oxidation Using Gold. Chem. Soc. Rev. 2008, 37, 2077-2095. DOI: 10.1039/B707319B

16

Philip, D. Synthesis and Spectroscopic Characterization of Gold Nanoparticles. Spectrochim. Acta, Part A 2008, 71, 80-85. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.saa.2007.11.012

17

Ebrahimzadeh, H.; Tavassoli, N.; Amini, M. M.; Fazaeli, Y.; Abedi, H. Determination of Very Low Levels of Gold and Palladium in Wastewater and Soil Samples by Atomic Absorption after Preconcentration on modified MCM-48 and MCM-41 Silica. Talanta 2010, 81, 1183-1188. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.talanta.2010.02.007

18

Grzelczak, M.; Pérez-Juste, J.; Mulvaney, P.; Liz-Marzán, L. Shape Control in Gold Nanoparticle Synthesis. Chem. Soc. Rev. 2008, 37, 1783-1791. DOI: 10.1039/B711490G

19

Mout, R.; Moyano, D. F.; Rana, S.; Rotello, V. M. Surface Functionalization of Nanoparticles for Nanomedicine. Chem. Soc. Rev. 2012, 41, 2539-2544. DOI: 10.1039/C2CS15294K

20

Christian, P.; Von der Kammer, F.; Baalousha, M.; Hofmann, T. Nanoparticles: Structure, Properties, Preparation and Behaviour in Environmental Media. Ecotoxicology 2008, 17, 326343. DOI:10.1007/s10646-008-0213-1



1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

21

Klaine, S. J.; Alvarez, P. J. J; Batley, G. E.; Fernandes, T. F.; Handy, R. D.; Lyon, D. Y.; Mahendra, S.; McLaughlin, M. J.; Lead, J. R. Nanomaterials in the Environment: Behavior, Fate, Bioavailability, and Effects. Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 2008, 27, 18251851. DOI: 10.1897/08-090.1

22

Glenn, J. B.; Klaine, S. J. Abiotic and Biotic Factors That Influence the Bioavailability of Gold

Nanoparticles to Aquatic Macrophytes. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2013, 47, 10223-10230. DOI: 10.1021/es4020508

23

Louie, S. M.; Tilton, R. D.; Lowry, G. V. Effects of Molecular Weight Distribution and Chemical Properties of Natural Organic Matter on Gold Nanoparticle Aggregation. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2013, 47, 4245-4254. DOI: 10.1021/es400137x

24

Davis, T. A.; Volesky, B.; Mucci, A. A Review of the Biochemistry of Heavy Metal Biosorption by Brown Algae. Water Res. 2003, 37, 4311-4330. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0043-1354(03)00293-8

25

Gacesa, P. Alginates. Carbohyd. Polym. 1988, 8, 161-182. https://doi.org/10.1016/01448617(88)90001-X

•

26

Flemming, H.-C.; Wingender, J. The Biofilm Matrix. Nat. Rev. Microbiol. 2010, 8, 623-633.

doi:10.1038/nrmicro2415

27

Clementi, F.; Crudele, M. A.; Parente, E.; Mancini, M.; Moresi, M. Production and Characterisation of Alginate from Azotobacter vinelandii. J. Sci. Food Agric. 1999, 79, 602-610. DOI: 10.1002/(SICI)1097-0010(19990315)79:43.0.CO;2-N 24 ACS Paragon Plus Environment

Page 24 of 30

Page 25 of 30

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60


28

Turkevich, J. Colloidal Gold. Part II. Gold Bull. 1985, 18, 125-131. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03214694 29

Kimling, J.; Maier, M.; Okenve, B.; Kotaidis, V.; Ballot, H.; Plech, A. Turkevich Method for Gold Nanoparticle Synthesis Revisited. J. Phys. Chem. B 2006, 110, 15700-15707. DOI: 10.1021/jp061667w

30

Wuithschick, M.; Birnbaum, A.; Witte, S.; Sztucki, M.; Vainio, U.; Pinna, N.; Rademann, K.; Emmerling, F.; Kraehnert, R.; Polte, J. Turkevich in New Robes: Key Questions Answered for the Most Common Gold Nanoparticle Synthesis. ACS Nano 2015, 9, 70527071. DOI:10.1021/acsnano.5b01579

31

Jana, N. R.; Gearheart, L.; Murphy, C. J. Seeding Growth for Size Control of 5-40 nm Diameter Gold Nanoparticles. Langmuir 2001, 17, 6782-6786. DOI: 10.1021/la0104323

32

Sau, T. K.; Murphy, C. J. Room Temperature, High-Yield Synthesis of Multiple Shapes of

Gold Nanoparticles in Aqueous Solution. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2004, 126, 8648-8649. DOI:10.1021/ja047846d 33

Sau, T. K.; Murphy, C. J. Seeded High Yield Synthesis of Short Au Nanorods in Aqueous Solution. Langmuir 2004, 20, 6414-6420. DOI:10.1021/la049463z

34

Gole, A.; Murphy, C. J. Polyelectrolyte-Coated Gold Nanorods: Synthesis, Characterization and Immobilization. Chem. Mater. 2005, 17, 1325-1330. DOI:10.1021/cm048297d

35

Orendorff, C. J.; Murphy, C. J. Quantitation of Metal Content in the Silver-Assisted Growth of Gold Nanorods. J. Phys. Chem. B 2006, 110, 3990-3994. DOI:10.1021/jp0570972

36

Khlebtsov, N. G. Determination of Size and Concentration of Gold Nanoparticles from Extinction Spectra. Anal. Chem. 2008, 80, 6629-6625. DOI: 10.1021/ac800834n

37

Haiss, W.; Thanh, N.T.; Aveyard, J.; Fernig, D.G. Determination of Size and Concentration of 25 ACS Paragon Plus Environment


1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

Gold Nanoparticles from UV-Vis Spectra. Anal. Chem. 2007, 79, 4215-4221. DOI:10.1021/ac0702084 38

Tripathi, S.; Champagne, D.; Tufenkji, N. Transport Behavior of Selected Nanoparticles with Different Surface Coatings in Granular Porous Media Coated with Pseudomonas aeruginosa Biofilm. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2012, 46, 6942-649. DOI: 10.1021/es202833k

39

Lee, K. Y.; Rowley, J. A.; Eiselt, P.; Moy, E. M.; Bouhadir, K. H.; Mooney, D. J. Controlling Mechanical and Swelling Properties of Alginate Hydrogels Independently by CrossLinker Type and Cross-Linking Density. Macromolecules 2000, 33, 4291-4294. DOI: 10.1021/ma9921347

40

Park, J.-W.; Shumaker-Parry, J. S. Strong Resistance of Citrate Anions on Metal Nanoparticles to Desorption under Thiol Functionalization. ACS Nano 2015, 9, 1665-1682. DOI: 10.1021/nn506379m

41

Leonov, A. P.; Zheng, J.; Clogston, J. D.; Stern, S. T.; Patri, A. K.; Wei, A. Detoxification of Gold Nanorods by Treatment with Polystyrenesulfonate. ACS Nano 2008, 2, 2481-2488. DOI: 10.1021/nn800466c

42

Huang, J.; Jackson, K. S.; Murphy, C. J. Polyelectrolyte Wrapping Layers Control Rates of Photothermal Molecular Release from Gold Nanorods. Nano Lett. 2012, 12, 2982-2987. DOI: 10.1021/nl3007402

43

Hicks, J. F.; Seok-Shon, Y.; Murray, R. W.; Layer-by-Layer Growth of Polymer/Nanoparticle Films Containing Monolayer-Protected Gold Clusters. Langmuir 2002, 18, 2288-2294. DOI: 10.1021/la0156255

44

Zhou, J.; Pishko, M. V.; Lutkenhaus, J. L. Thermoresponsive Layer-by-Layer Assemblies for Nanoparticle-Based Drug Delivery. Langmuir 2014, 30, 5903-5910. DOI: 10.1021/la501047m 26 ACS Paragon Plus Environment

Page 26 of 30

Page 27 of 30

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60


45

Artyukhin, A. B.; Bakajin, O.; Stroeve, P.; Noy, A. Layer-by-Layer Electrostatic SelfAssembly of Polyelectrolyte Nanoshells on Individual Carbon Nanotube Templates. Langmuir 2004, 20, 1442-1448. DOI: 10.1021/la035699b

46

Burns, J. M.; Pennington, P. L.; Sisco, P. N.; Frey, R.; Kashiwada, S.; Fulton, M. H.; Scott, G. I.; Decho, A. W.; Murphy, C. J.; Shaw, T. J.; Ferry, J. L. Surface Charge Controls the Fate of Gold Nanorods in Saline Estuaries. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2013, 47, 1284412851. DOI: 10.1021/es402880u

47

Ferry, J.L.; Craig, P.; Hexel, C. Sisco, P.; Frey, R.; Pennington, P.L.; Fulton, M.H.; Scott, G.; Decho, A.W.; Kashiwada, S.; Murphy, C.J.; Shaw, T.J. Transfer of Gold Nanoparticles from the Water Column to the Estuarine Food Web. Nature Nanotech. 2009, 4, 441-444. doi:10.1038/nnano.2009.157

48

Darlington, T. K.; Neigh, A. M.; Spencer, M. T.; Nguyen, O. T.; Oldenburg, S. J. Nanoparticle Characteristics Affecting Environmental Fate and Transport Through Soil. Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 2009, 28, 1191-1199. DOI: 10.1897/08-341.1

49

Lin, D.; Tian, X.; Wu, F.; Xing, B. Fate and Transport of Engineered Nanomaterials in the Environment. J. Environmental Qual. 2010, 39, 1896-1908. doi:10.2134/jeq2009.0423

50

51

52

Liang, Y.; Bradford, S.A.; Simunek, J.; Heggen, M.; Vereecken, H.; Klumpp, E. Retention and Remobilization of Stabilized Silver Nanoparticles in an Undisturbed Loamy Sand Soil. Environ. Sci. Tech. 2013, 47, 12229-12237. DOI: 10.1021/es402046u Makelson, J.; Zhou, D.; Engelhardt, I.; Jacques, D.; Klumpp, E. Experimental and Numerical Investigations of Silver Nanoparticle Transport under Variable Flow and Ionic Strength in Soil. Environ. Sci. Tech. 2017, 51, 2096-2104. DOI: 10.1021/acs.est.6b04882 Alkilany, A. M.; Lohse, S. E.; Murphy, C. J. The Gold Standard: Gold Nanoparticle Libraries to Understand the Nano-Bio Interface. Acc. Chem. Res. 2013, 46, 650-661. DOI: 10.1021/ar300015b 27 ACS Paragon Plus Environment


1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

53

Burns, C.; Spendel, W. U.; Puckett, S.; Pacey, G. E. Solution Ionic Strength Effect on Gold Nanoparticle Solution Color Transition. Talanta 2006, 69, 873-876. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.talanta.2005.11.038

54

Stover, R.J.; Moaseri, E.; Gourisankar, S.P.; Iqbal, M.; Rahbar, N.K.; Changalvaie, B.; Truskett, T.M.; Johnston, K.P. Formation of Small Gold Nanoparticle Chains with High NIR extinction through Bridging with Calcium Ions. Langmuir 2016, 32, 1172. DOI: 10.1021/acs.langmuir.5b03639

55

Lee, B.-T.; Ranville, J. F. The Effect of Hardness on the Stability of Citrate-Stabilized Gold Nanoparticles and their Uptake by Daphnia magna. J. Hazard. Mater. 2012, 213, 434439. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2012.02.025

56

Chinnapongse, S. L.; MacCuspie, R. I.; Hackley, V. A. Persistence of Singly Dispersed Silver Nanoparticles in Natural Freshwaters, Synthetic Seawater, and Simulated Estuarine Waters. Sci. Total Environ. 2011, 409, 2443-2450. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2011.03.020

57

: Nikoobakht,

B.; El_Sayed, M.A. Evidence for Bilayer Assembly of Cationic Surfactants on

the Surface of Gold Nanorods. Langmuir 2001, 17, 6368. DOI:10.1021/la010530o 58

Dahdal, Y. N.; Pipich, V.; Rapaport, H.; Oren, Y.: Kasher, O. R.; Schwahn, D. Small-Angle Neutron Scattering Studies of Alginate as Biomineralizing Agent and Scale Initiator. Polymer 2016, 85, 77-88. doi:10.1016/j.polymer.2016.01.012.

59

Stankus, D. P.; Lohse, S. E.; Hutchison, J. E.; Nason, J. A. Interactions Between Natural Organic Matter and Gold Nanoparticles Stabilized with Different Organic Capping Agents. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2011, 45, 3238-3244. DOI: 10.1021/es102603p


Page 28 of 30

Page 29 of 30

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60


60

Becker, T. A.; Kipe, D. R.; Brandon, T. Calcium Alginate Gel: A Biocompatible and Mechanically Stable Polymer for Endovascular Embolization. J. Biomed. Mater. Res. 2001, 54, 76-86. DOI: 10.1002/1097-4636(200101)54:13.0.CO;2-V

61

Smith, B. M.; Pike, D. J.; Kelly, M. O.; Nason, J. A. Quantification of Heteroaggregation Between Citrate-Stabilized Gold Nanoparticles and Hematite Colloids. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2015, 49, 12789-12797. DOI: 10.1021/acs.est.5b03486

62

Dominguez, G. A.; Lohse, S. E.; Torelli, M. D.; Murphy, C. J.; Hamers, R. J.; Orr, G.; Klaper, R. D. Effects of Charge and Surface Ligand Properties of Nanoparticles on Oxidative Stress and Gene Expression Within the Gut of Daphnia Magna. Aquat. Toxicol. 2015, 162, 1-9. DOI: 10.1002/smll.200801716

63

Bar-Ilan, O.; Albrecht, R. M.; Fako, V. E.; Furgeson, D. Y. Toxicity Assesments of Multisized Gold and Silver Nanoparticles in Zebrafish Embryos. Small 2009, 5, 1897-1910. DOI: 10.1002/smll.200801716



1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

For Table of Contents Use Only

Synopsis. The retention of functionalized gold nanoparticles in two well-characterized soil types and their physiochemical transformations in simulated groundwater are investigated.


Page 30 of 30

Nanomaterial Probes in the Environment: Gold Nanoparticle Soil

Recommend Documents