Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

How to distinguish natural versus engineered nanomaterials: insights from the analysis of TiO2 and CeO2 in soils

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Environmental Chemistry Letters Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Increasing amounts of engineered nanomaterials such as TiO2 and CeO2 are released into air, waters, soils, and sediments. However, assessing the human-made origin of those nanomaterials is rather difficult because Ti- and Ce-rich particles are naturally present in soils and sediments at concentrations typically much higher than estimated concentrations of engineered nanomaterials. In addition, analysis is complicated by the interactions and aggregation of nanoparticles with environmental particles. Therefore, more knowledge on the properties of natural nanomaterials is needed to distinguish engineered nanomaterials in natural systems. Here, we extracted soil nanomaterials with six extractants and compared recovery and disaggregation to primary particles. Nanomaterials were characterized for hydrodynamic diameter and zeta potential by dynamic light scattering, size-based elemental distribution by field-flow fractionation coupled with inductively coupled plasma-mass spectroscopy, and morphology by transmission electron microscopy. Results show that nanomaterial concentrations increased from CH3COOH–NaCl–water (lowest), to water or NaCl–water, Na2CO3, Na4P2O7, and NaCl–Na4P2O7 (highest). Na4P2O7 was the most efficient extractant that induced the release of primary nanomaterials from microaggregates. Although sodium carbonate extracted relatively high concentrations of nanomaterials, the extracted nanomaterials occurred mainly as aggregates of primary nanomaterials. Ultrapure water, sodium chloride and acetic acid resulted in poor nanomaterial extraction and broad size distributions. Elemental ratios illustrate that Ti is associated with Nb, Ta, and V, and that Ce is associated with rare earth elements such as La, Eu, Y, Ho, Er, Tm, and Yb. Our findings indicate that size, size distribution, and elemental ratios can be used as fingerprints to differentiate engineered nanomaterials such as TiO2 and CeO2 from natural nanomaterials in complex media.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

Download references

Acknowledgements

We acknowledge funding from the US National Science Foundation (NSF#1553909), China Scholarship Council (CSC_201606380069) and the Swiss National Foundation (P2GEP2_165046). This work was supported by the Virginia Tech National Center for Earth and Environmental Nanotechnology Infrastructure (NanoEarth), a member of the National Nanotechnology Coordinated Infrastructure (NNCI), supported by NSF (ECCS 1542100).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mohammed Baalousha.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 1995 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Yi, Z., Loosli, F., Wang, J. et al. How to distinguish natural versus engineered nanomaterials: insights from the analysis of TiO2 and CeO2 in soils. Environ Chem Lett 18, 215–227 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10311-019-00926-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10311-019-00926-5

Keywords

Navigation