Next Article in Journal
Metabolomic and Gene Expression Studies Reveal the Diversity, Distribution and Spatial Regulation of the Specialized Metabolism of Yacón (Smallanthus sonchifolius, Asteraceae)
Previous Article in Journal
Validation of Breast Cancer Margins by Tissue Spray Mass Spectrometry
Previous Article in Special Issue
The Recent Progress in Nanotoxicology and Nanosafety from the Point of View of Both Toxicology and Ecotoxicology
Review

A Review on the Environmental Fate Models for Predicting the Distribution of Engineered Nanomaterials in Surface Waters

Department of Environmental Engineering, National Cheng Kung University, Tainan City 701, Taiwan
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2020, 21(12), 4554; https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/ijms21124554
Received: 28 March 2020 / Revised: 14 June 2020 / Accepted: 16 June 2020 / Published: 26 June 2020
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Nanotoxicology and Nanosafety 2.0)
Exposure assessment is a key component in the risk assessment of engineered nanomaterials (ENMs). While direct and quantitative measurements of ENMs in complex environmental matrices remain challenging, environmental fate models (EFMs) can be used alternatively for estimating ENMs’ distributions in the environment. This review describes and assesses the development and capability of EFMs, focusing on surface waters. Our review finds that current engineered nanomaterial (ENM) exposure models can be largely classified into three types: material flow analysis models (MFAMs), multimedia compartmental models (MCMs), and spatial river/watershed models (SRWMs). MFAMs, which is already used to derive predicted environmental concentrations (PECs), can be used to estimate the releases of ENMs as inputs to EFMs. Both MCMs and SRWMs belong to EFMs. MCMs are spatially and/or temporally averaged models, which describe ENM fate processes as intermedia transfer of well-mixed environmental compartments. SRWMs are spatiotemporally resolved models, which consider the variability in watershed and/or stream hydrology, morphology, and sediment transport of river networks. As the foundation of EFMs, we also review the existing and emerging ENM fate processes and their inclusion in recent EFMs. We find that while ENM fate processes, such as heteroaggregation and dissolution, are commonly included in current EFMs, few models consider photoreaction and sulfidation, evaluation of the relative importance of fate processes, and the fate of weathered/transformed ENMs. We conclude the review by identifying the opportunities and challenges in using EFMs for ENMs. View Full-Text
Keywords: engineered nanomaterials; environmental fate models; surface waters; ENM fate processes engineered nanomaterials; environmental fate models; surface waters; ENM fate processes
Show Figures

Figure 1

MDPI and ACS Style

Suhendra, E.; Chang, C.-H.; Hou, W.-C.; Hsieh, Y.-C. A Review on the Environmental Fate Models for Predicting the Distribution of Engineered Nanomaterials in Surface Waters. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2020, 21, 4554. https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/ijms21124554

AMA Style

Suhendra E, Chang C-H, Hou W-C, Hsieh Y-C. A Review on the Environmental Fate Models for Predicting the Distribution of Engineered Nanomaterials in Surface Waters. International Journal of Molecular Sciences. 2020; 21(12):4554. https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/ijms21124554

Chicago/Turabian Style

Suhendra, Edward, Chih-Hua Chang, Wen-Che Hou, and Yi-Chin Hsieh. 2020. "A Review on the Environmental Fate Models for Predicting the Distribution of Engineered Nanomaterials in Surface Waters" International Journal of Molecular Sciences 21, no. 12: 4554. https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/ijms21124554

Find Other Styles
Note that from the first issue of 2016, MDPI journals use article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Access Map by Country/Region

1
Back to TopTop