The interaction of a living organism with external foreign agents is a central issue for its survival and adaptation to the environment. Nanosafety should be considered within this perspective, and it should be examined that how different organisms interact with engineered nanomaterials (NM) by either mounting a defensive response or by physiologically adapting to them. Herein, the interaction of NM with one of the major biological systems deputed to recognition of and response to foreign challenges, i.e., the immune system, is specifically addressed. The main focus is innate immunity, the only type of immunity in plants, invertebrates, and lower vertebrates, and that coexists with adaptive immunity in higher vertebrates. Because of their presence in the majority of eukaryotic living organisms, innate immune responses can be viewed in a comparative context. In the majority of cases, the interaction of NM with living organisms results in innate immune reactions that eliminate the possible danger with mechanisms that do not lead to damage. While in some cases such interaction may lead to pathological consequences, in some other cases beneficial effects can be identified.

No abstract

No abstract

Many components of the innate immune system are evolutionarily conserved and shared across many living organisms, from plants and invertebrates to humans. Therefore, these shared features can allow the comparative study of potentially dangerous substances, such as engineered nanoparticles (NPs). However, differences of methodology and procedure between diverse species and models make comparison of innate immune responses to NPs between organisms difficult in many cases. To this aim, this review provides an overview of suitable methods and assays that can be used to measure NP immune interactions across species in a multidisciplinary approach. The first part of this review describes the main innate immune defense characteristics of the selected models that can be associated to NPs exposure. In the second part, the different modes of exposure to NPs across models (considering isolated cells or whole organisms) and the main endpoints measured are discussed. In this synergistic perspective, we provide an overview of the current state of important cross-disciplinary immunological models to study NP-immune interactions and identify future research needs. As such, this paper could be used as a methodological reference point for future nano-immunosafety studies.

We compared the changes of selected immune parameters of Porcellio scaber to different stressors. The animals were either fed for two weeks with Au nanoparticles (NPs), CeO2 NPs, or Au ions or body-injected with Au NPs, CeO2 NPs, or lipopolysaccharide endotoxin. Contrary to expectations, the feeding experiment showed that both NPs caused a significant increase in the total haemocyte count (THC). In contrast, the ion-positive control resulted in a significantly decreased THC. Additionally, changes in phenoloxidase (PO)-like activity, haemocyte viability, and nitric oxide (NO) levels seemed to depend on the stressor. Injection experiments also showed stressor-dependant changes in measured parameters, such as CeO2 NPs and lipopolysaccharide endotoxin (LPS), caused more significant responses than Au NPs. These results show that feeding and injection of NPs caused an immune response and that the response differed significantly, depending on the exposure route. We did not expect the response to ingested NPs, due to the low exposure concentrations (100 μg/g dry weight food) and a firm gut epithelia, along with a lack of phagocytosis in the digestive system, which would theoretically prevent NPs from crossing the biological barrier. It remains a challenge for future research to reveal what the physiological and ecological significance is for the organism to sense and respond, via the immune system, to ingested foreign material.