Abstract
The increased use and incorporation of engineered nanoparticles (ENPs) in consumer products requires a robust assessment of their potential environmental implications. However, a lack of standardized methods for nanotoxicity testing has yielded results that are sometimes contradictory. Standard ecotoxicity assays may work appropriately for some ENPs with minimal modification but produce artifactual results for others. Therefore, understanding the robustness of assays for a range of ENPs is critical. In this study, we evaluated the performance of a standard Caenorhabditis elegans ( C. elegans) toxicity assay containing an Escherichia coli ( E. coli) food supply with silicon, polystyrene, and gold ENPs with different charged coatings and sizes. Of all the ENPs tested, only those with a positively charged coating caused growth inhibition. However, the positively charged ENPs were observed to heteroagglomerate with E. coli cells, suggesting that the ENPs impacted the ability of nematodes to feed, leading to a false positive toxic effect on C. elegans growth and reproduction. When the ENPs were tested in two alternate C. elegans assays that did not contain E. coli, we found greatly reduced toxicity of ENPs. This study illustrates a key unexpected artifact that may occur during nanotoxicity assays.