The authors critically reviewed published lists of nano-objects and their physico-chemical properties deemed important for risk assessment and discussed metrological challenges associated with the development of nanoscale reference materials (RMs). Five lists were identified that contained 25 (classes of) nano-objects; only four (gold, silicon dioxide, silver, titanium dioxide) appeared on all lists. Twenty-three properties were identified for characterisation; only (specific) surface area appeared on all lists. The key themes that emerged from this review were: 1) various groups have prioritised nano-objects for development as "candidate RMs" with limited consensus; 2) a lack of harmonised terminology hinders accurate description of many nano-object properties; 3) many properties identified for characterisation are ill-defined or qualitative and hence are not metrologically traceable; 4) standardised protocols are critically needed for characterisation of nano-objects as delivered in relevant media and as administered to toxicological models; 5) the measurement processes being used to characterise a nano-object must be understood because instruments may measure a given sample in a different way; 6) appropriate RMs should be used for both accurate instrument calibration and for more general testing purposes (e.g., protocol validation); 7) there is a need to clarify that where RMs are not available, if "(representative) test materials" that lack reference or certified values may be useful for toxicology testing and 8) there is a need for consensus building within the nanotechnology and environmental, health and safety communities to prioritise RM needs and better define the required properties and (physical or chemical) forms of the candidate materials.

Novel biodegradable nanoelastomers are synthesized. They can self-assemble and generate morphologies in nanometric, micrometric, or bulk scale with tunable properties. They are smart biodegradable materials with potential applications.

Despite the fact that there exist several techniques capable of characterizing nanoparticle sizes, their measurement results from the same sample often deviate from each other by an amount that is considered significant on the nanometre scale. In the absence of international standards, or worldwide recognized protocols dealing with nanoparticle characterization, an APEC-led preliminary interlaboratory comparison on nanoparticle size characterization was carried out among ten laboratories from six member economies. Test samples of nanoparticles of 20 nm and 100 nm nominal sizes were distributed for measurements by dynamic light scattering (DLS), transmission electron microscopy (TEM), scanning electron microscopy (SEM), atomic force microcopy (AFM) and differential mobility analyser (DMA). The comparison result showed fair agreement among the measurements on the certified reference materials (CRM) of 20 nm and 100 nm nanoparticles. Greater deviation was observed on the 20 nm nanosilver colloid sample. This comparison was regarded as a preliminary study on the measurement consistency among various nanoscale measurement techniques.

This study discusses the strategies on sample preparation to acquire images with sufficient quality for size characterization by scanning electron microscope (SEM) using two commercial ZnO nanoparticles of different surface properties as a demonstration. The central idea is that micrometer sized aggregates of ZnO in powdered forms need to firstly be broken down to nanosized particles through an appropriate process to generate nanoparticle dispersion before being deposited on a flat surface for SEM observation. Analytical tools such as contact angle, dynamic light scattering and zeta potential have been utilized to optimize the procedure for sample preparation and to check the quality of the results. Meanwhile, measurements of zeta potential values on flat surfaces also provide critical information and save lots of time and efforts in selection of suitable substrate for particles of different properties to be attracted and kept on the surface without further aggregation. This simple, low-cost methodology can be generally applied on size characterization of commercial ZnO nanoparticles with limited information from vendors.