Nanomaterials (NMs) pose challenges in performing bioaccumulation studies in fish and in regulatory interpretation of results. Therefore, a clear guidance is needed to obtain reliable, reproducible and comparable results. By analysing all the available literature, we aim in this manuscript to identify the critical aspects that should be addressed in these type of studies. Seventy-eight studies from a total of 67 published articles were identified in which a variety of approaches were used: aqueous exposure (49 studies), dietary exposure (19), and pre-exposed animals for trophic transfer studies (10). The NMs tested included TiO2, Zn, ZnO, Cu, CuO, Ag, Au, CeO2, Fe2O3, Fe3O4, Se, CdS, CdSe/ZnS-QDs, CdTe/ZnS-QDs, graphene, fullerenol and MWCNTs. In general, there is a scarcity of bioaccumulation studies for the different NMs. In particular, studies that use the dietary exposure route are lacking. TiO2 NMs are the most studied for bioaccumulation potential in fish (20%), whereas very few data were available for CuO, FeO and carbon-based NMs. Different information gaps were identified in these studies that hamper overall conclusions to be made on the bioaccumulation potential of NMs. The main critical issues related to NM testing for bioaccumulation include: maintenance of stable exposure concentrations, the influence of feeding regimen on uptake and elimination, the use of appropriate feed spiking methodologies, the potential need for testing different concentrations, and the reporting of bioaccumulation endpoints (BCF/BMF). Each of these issues needs further guidance to allow proper use and reporting of NM bioaccumulation data for regulatory purposes.
Keywords: Aqueous; Bioaccumulation; Dietary; Fish; Nanomaterials; OECD TG 305.
Copyright © 2022 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.