Open access peer-reviewed chapter

Oxidative Stress Produced by Urban Atmospheric Nanoparticles

Written By

Daniela-Rodica Mitrea, Alina-Mihaela Toader and Oana-Alina Hoteiuc

Submitted: November 23rd, 2018 Reviewed: February 4th, 2019 Published: March 1st, 2019

DOI: 10.5772/intechopen.84923

From the Edited Volume


Edited by Simona Clichici, Adriana Filip and Gustavo M. do Nascimento

Chapter metrics overview

847 Chapter Downloads

View Full Metrics


In urban areas, the diesel-fuelled and bio-fuelled vehicles represent the major sources of nanoparticles complemented by nanotechnology with different types of particles, in addition to natural and to other anthropogenic sources. The atmospheric nanoparticles differ in composition, size, shape or oxidant capacity, presenting a large variability that causes difficulties in their measurements and health impact identification. The oxidative stress can be initiated by atmospheric nanoparticles through different mechanisms: interaction between nanoparticles and tissue cells, cellular internalisation of nanoparticles, activation of signalling pathways, decrease of the cellular antioxidants, activation of the pro-inflammatory cascade, lipid peroxidation, activation of cellular signalling pathway that leads to apoptosis, etc. Ultrafine particles (<100 nm) represent ~80% of the total atmospheric particles and produce inflammation through oxidative stress mechanisms. The atmospheric nanoparticles can penetrate the skin and can be inhaled or ingested affecting different organs and leading to different diseases: neurodegeneration, thrombogenesis, atherosclerosis, asthma, lung cancer, heart arrest, etc.


  • nanoparticles
  • particulate matter
  • urban atmosphere
  • reactive oxygen species
  • oxidative stress
  • atmospheric ultrafine particles
  • diesel exhaust particles
  • air pollution

1. Introduction

Urban atmosphere contains a mixture of nanoparticles with high variation in structure, number and chemical composition. This atmospheric nanoparticles’ diversity is in close relationship with the natural or industrial sources, urban area location and meteorological conditions. In the troposphere, the nanoparticles can be found at all altitudes from sea level to 10 km, with concentrations that can largely vary between 102 and 105 particles/cm3 [1]. Atmospheric nanoparticles are of different chemical structures (unstable molecules or ions, stable nuclei) with various shapes (most of them have irregular aspect) and with many origins. The human body can be affected by nanoparticles exposure, because these particles penetrate easily through skin, respiratory system, or digestive tract. The atmospheric nanoparticles can produce oxidative stress through different mechanisms, from the reactive oxygen species (ROS) synthesis till the decreasing of body’s antioxidant capacity [2].

This chapter will use the terms nanoparticles (NPs) or particulate matter (PM0.1) for particles with sizes lower than 100 nm (lower than 0.1 μm).


2. Atmospheric nanoparticles

Earth’s atmosphere contains particles with sizes between few nanometres and hundreds micrometres. They are produced naturally or by anthropogenic emissions, in concentrations that vary greatly, in accordance with the geographical areas and meteorological conditions. Naturally, the atmospheric particles can be produced from many sources: sea salt aerosols produced by breaking waves [3], cosmic dust [4], atmospheric formation of NPs from atmospheric particles (for example, photochemically induced nucleation) [5], forest’s aerosols [6], volcanic eruptions, or forest fires. Anthropogenic emissions that produce atmospheric particles are represented by: vehicles, industry, power plants, incinerators, nanotechnology [7], fossil fuel exploitation, mining techniques, stone quarries [8], etc. Over the continents, close to the ground, the air contains 103–105 nanoparticles/cm3, most of them chemically generated through coagulation or condensation [9].

Atmospheric particles are classified according to their diameter into: supercoarse, coarse, fine and ultrafine particles. Supercoarse particles (>10,000 nm diameter) do not enter the respiratory system. The coarse particles (diameter 2500–10,000 nm), represented by pollen, spores, sea salt aerosols, or by the particles generated through wind erosion, deposit on the ground within few hours after their production but can also enter the upper airways of the human respiratory tract, from where they can be eliminated back into the atmosphere by coughing, or they can be ingested by swallowing [10]. The fine particles (100–2500 nm diameter) produced naturally (through nuclei-mode particles coagulation or through vapour molecules condensation on particles surfaces) but mostly through anthropogenic processes (vehicles or industry emissions) [11], can enter the respiratory tract till the alveoli level. Because the fine particles have small diameters, the gravitational forces affect them only partially and they can persist in the atmosphere for days or weeks, being also able to travel over long distances [12]. Ultrafine particles (<100 nm diameter), also named nanoparticles, are produced through condensation of vapour molecules and form nuclei, instable particles that persist in atmosphere only for a short time (few minutes till few hours), close to their source, with rapid changes in number distribution. The inhaled NPs can pass through the respiratory membrane, entering the blood and travelling through the circulatory and lymphatic systems to the body’s organs [13].

The atmospheric particle concentration is influenced by meteorological conditions. Wind speed improves the atmospheric air, especially if it is higher than 6 m/s. The temperature influences the air quality: a very high or a very low temperature is correlated with increased concentration of atmospheric particles because usually, these extreme temperatures occur synchronous with high atmospheric pressure that blocks the air motion. The high cloudiness is usually accompanied by low atmospheric pressure and high-speed winds, conditions that reduce the particles concentration in the atmosphere. The association of thin planetary boundary layer (peplosphere, the lower part of the troposphere) with high atmospheric pressure can block the particle motions, leading to an increased density of noxious substances in the air [14]. The urban areas located in valleys present atmosphere with reduced particle dispersion and have winds of low speed, conditions that lead to increased concentration of particles [15]. In the urban zones located in arid areas, the strong wind increases the particulate matter concentration [16].

2.1 Sources, chemical composition and morphological aspects of atmospheric nanoparticles

The diversity of atmospheric nanoparticles, as a result of highly variable sources and chemical composition, can explain the different effects on human body. Inorganic compounds (nitrates, ammonium, sulphates, trace metals) and organic compounds (hopanes from engine oils, organic acids) can attach noxious substances and can lead to severe diseases. The industrial zones release the atmosphere nanoparticles with high quantities of Fe, K (from biomass burning), or Ca (found in oil as additive) [17, 18, 19].

In urban atmosphere, different types of metallic NPs were identified, from which 50% contain two or more metals in their composition [20]. The most common metals are Fe, Ca, Al, Mg, Zn, Na, and they have many sources, from vehicles emission to industrial processes [21]. The principal source for metallic nanoparticles is represented by the vehicles through lubricating oil additives [22], diesel fuel additives [23], brake mechanism (releases 26–44% PM0.1 because of metal volatilisation by heating) [24] and tyre dust (emits NPs of 15–50 nm diameter) [25]. Metallic NPs can also be produced through the wood combustion [26] and in port areas, by marine diesel engines [27]. Nanoparticles emitted by diesel engines contain a core made from solid elemental carbon and a layer of volatile organic carbon. They are of 10–50 nm diameter and can attach water-soluble ions, traces of elements from lubricants, or from engine functional abrasion [28].

Decamethylcyclopentasiloxane (D5), a volatile cyclic siloxane, found in personal care products is released in atmosphere in big quantities, with high concentrations during winter (~1 ng/m3) and low concentrations during summer (~0.3 ng/m3). D5 is transported in the atmosphere over long distances, but with seasonal variation, depending on the availability of OH radical (OH˙) in the air, an oxygen species with which it reacts very quickly. Even if D5 can persist for almost 10 days in the atmosphere, it reaches the ground very rarely [29].

Silicon, a common compound of atmospheric nanoparticles, is detected in high concentrations in geographical areas with anthropogenic sources, with maximum levels during the daytime because Si-NPs production occurs through photochemical reactions. The oxidation of D5 leads to the development of Si nanoparticles in urban areas [30].

Morphological aspects of atmospheric nanoparticles differ in concordance with the emitting sources. The NPs identified in rail subways have specific chemical composition and specific morphology. Fe-NPs have irregular aspects: flake-like, botryoidal, crystal-like, or aggregated particles and most of them contain carbon. Calcium and silicon are often identified in the platform environment. In the subway’s air, there also exist high concentrations of other metals (Zn, Ti, Sb) and traces of Al, K, Na, Mg, Cr, Co, S and Cl. Most of the inhaled Fe-NPs have the flake aspect, with different incorporated compounds [31].

2.2 Production of urban atmospheric nanoparticles

Ultrafine particles are produced through nucleation (vapour substances condense around the particles). An increase in atmospheric concentration of sulphuric acid leads, within 1–2 h, to an increase in particle number [32], with a reduced particle growth rate [33]. Sulphuric acid is considered an important factor for aerosol nucleation that leads to production of 2–3 nm NPs. Organic vapours can also produce nanoparticles with dimension that depend on the particle acidity, relative humidity and mechanisms of synthesis. Amines can lead to 4 nm NPs production, while organic carbonyls (aldehydes, α-dicarbonyls) can develop 4–6 nm particles [34].

Atmospheric nanoparticles can also be produced through evaporation of volatile compounds of larger particles [35].

The ultrafine particles with sizes between 1.5 and 2 nm form new larger particles through homogenous nucleation, process that occurs rapidly and leads to NPs dilution near the emission source [36]. Dry or wet depositions of particulate matter to the surfaces are important only for particles larger than 100 nm [37]. Most of the atmospheric NPs are too small to form cloud droplets that can be eliminated from the air by rain. The rainfall rate and the rain duration are important factors in NPs removing from the air, by production of larger particles that can be wet-deposited on surfaces [38].

There exist big differences in nanoparticles concentration measured in rural areas (2.6 × 103 to 4.8 × 103 particles/cm3), in urban environments (42.1 × 103 to 48.2 × 103 particles/cm3) [39] and in road tunnels (167.7 × 103 particles/cm3) [40]. The rate of nanoparticles production is ~102 NPs/cm3/s in urban areas and 104 to 105 NPs/cm3/second in industrial and costal zones [41].

In urban atmosphere, the anthropogenic emissions represent the major sources of NPs, the vehicle emissions producing ~86% of the total atmospheric ultrafine particles [42]. There are many factors that can affect the NPs number concentration after vehicle emissions and among them, dilution is the most important event that depends on traffic conditions and has a duration of about 1 s [43]. Petrol (gasoline)-fuelled vehicles emit a low number of nanoparticles with sizes between 20 and 60 nm, while diesel-fuelled vehicles emit the most of atmospheric NPs but with a higher diameter, 20–130 nm [44]. An important factor for NPs emitted in the atmosphere is the driving manner: the petrol-fuelled vehicles driven at high speed (~120 km/h) and acceleration of these cars lead to emission of NPs in a similar number with the NPs number recorded at the diesel-fuelled cars emission [45]. The particles emitted by the vehicles are classified, according to their formation, into two groups: primary and secondary. The primary particles are released directly in the atmosphere like adsorbed or condensed hydrocarbons, sulphur compounds or metallic ash and their size is between 30 and 500 nm. The secondary particles are produced in the atmosphere from emitted hot gases that cool and condensate as nanoparticles with diameter lower than 30 nm, consisting of hydrated sulphuric acid and hydrocarbons [46].

Another factor that increases the particles concentration in the atmosphere is represented by the interaction between road and tyres [47].

In urban atmosphere, the industrial sources also contribute to NPs production, but only with 2%.

Nanotechnology developed new types of nanoparticles that are different in comparison with those found in the atmosphere, and even if these engineered NPs are incorporated in different products, they can escape in the environment, increasing the concentration of atmospheric ultrafine particles [48].

Cosmic dust enters the Earth atmosphere with 40,000 tons of particles/year. The cosmic particulate matter with low-velocity, mostly from asteroids and comets, can reach the ground [49, 50]. In the atmosphere, most of the cosmic particles are destroyed but some of PM0.1 are vaporised and then recondensed into individual particles, being a source of iron nanoparticles [51].

2.3 Atmospheric nanoparticles in different urban areas

In urban atmosphere, the complex and turbulent mixing mechanisms influence the NPs flow around or over the buildings and streets.

The highest concentration of particulate matter is recorded in traffic intersections, but it is also increased in street canyons and on the roadsides, in comparison with the urban peripheral areas [52].

Within the street canyons, the nanoparticles’ concentration depends on: traffic, atmospheric conditions (wind flow velocity, air temperature) [53, 54], street dimensions (large or narrow), street style (trees, street squares) and buildings’ type (small or tall, balconies, walls roughness) [55].

In traffic intersection atmosphere, the concentration of nanoparticles emitted by cars depends on driving conditions. It is maximum during deceleration, it presents increased values during acceleration or cruising, and it is minimum during idling. The stop-and-go driving at the roads intersection produces NPs that can be identified in an area between 120 and 379 m, depending on intersection type [56].

The road tunnels environment has specific characteristics due to the “piston effect” produced by the traffic direction that generates a turbulent flow of mixed NPs-vehicle generated [57]. These specific properties of road tunnel air (that are not influenced by meteorological conditions), and the presence of high concentrations of precursor molecules provide the appropriate environment for nanoparticles formation (through nucleation) that are then transformed into larger molecules (through coagulation) [58].

In underground car park, the particulate matter concentration is higher than in opened urban area, with values that vary according to the traffic and dust presence on the ground. The entrance air in the park contains lesser concentrations of particulate matter than the exit air (acceleration, disc brake friction, dust re-suspension). The elements identified in underground car park environment are: Fe and Mn (the most abundant and related to dust re-suspension) and Zn and Cu (related to brake abrasion and tyre wear) [59].

On rail subways, the nanoparticles are made up of Fe, and their concentration, number and size are dependent on the train speed, pressure exerted on the rails, material of rails and wheels, lubricants used to reduce the wear, and on the temperature generated by the rail-wheel contact [60]. The nanoparticles concentrations are much higher than those above the ground [61]. Most of the NPs consist of Fe structures that are unique to the subways air, and their dimensions are very small [62].


3. Urban atmospheric nanoparticles in the human body: penetration, storage and elimination

The short-term exposure to atmospheric NPs exacerbates the chronic pulmonary and cardiovascular diseases and the long-term or repeated exposure can lead to death [63].

The respiratory system, digestive tract and skin are passed by the atmospheric nanoparticles [64], process that leads to oxidative stress, inflammation, or other pathological effects. The noxious effects of NPs depend on their size, chemical structure, or shape [65]. The skin penetration of atmospheric nanoparticles is realised transcellular (NPs <75 nm), intercellular, through the hair follicles, sweat and sebaceous glands [66]. Inside the dermal fibroblasts, nanoparticles generate genotoxic effects [67] and in the keratinocytes produce oxidative stress with DNA damages [68]. The structure of hair cuticula and of follicular canal permits mostly the passage of fine particles (~300–600 nm) [69]. The respiratory system is another entering route for nanoparticles through inhalation or through the wall of air passageways [70].

The storage of atmospheric nanoparticles is realised in many organs: lymph nodes, spleen, lungs, liver, brain, bladder, cardiovascular system, bone marrow, etc. [71].

The penetrated nanoparticles can be eliminated from the body through the faeces and urine, in quantities that are related to the NPs properties [72].


4. Oxidative stress produced by urban atmospheric nanoparticles

Space weather affects the human body, initiating different pathological mechanisms [73]. High-energy cosmic radiation may interact with atoms, compresses them, and pushes the electrons into the nucleus, leading to the transformation of protons into neutrons, with electron neutrinos release [74]. In the body’s tissues with high amount of H+, neutrons can produce the recoil protons, subatomic particles that can destroy the cells [75]. Neutrons can be carried inside the human body by the atmospheric NPs [76], where they can produce oxidative stress that damages the tissues.

Decamethylcyclopentasiloxane (D5), a highly volatile substance, affects the human body only after long-term exposures, leading to the decreased secretion of prolactin from the pituitary gland because of its indirect dopamine-like effects, or to the lung inflammation [77]. The respiratory system is affected by most of the air nanoparticles, the oxidative stress and sensitisation being the common mechanisms that initiate or exacerbate the asthma [78]. Oxidative stress promotes DNA alterations and other cellular disturbances that may lead to lung cancer [79].

The nanoparticles emitted by diesel engines have chemical structures (elemental carbon with absorbed organic compounds, metals, nitrates, sulphate, etc.) that can cause inflammation and oxidative stress in the lungs [80] but they can also pass into the brain [81] and initiate pathological processes in the central nervous system [82]. Inhaled diesel NPs not only affect the CNS through direct mechanisms because they can cross the blood-brain barrier, but also through indirect processes that involve the cytokines released from the areas where respiratory and cardiovascular inflammation develop. Microglia activation, oxidative stress, vessels microlesions and neurotoxic effect of cytokines stimulate the neurons degeneration [83]. Organic matter combustion or frictional heating of brake pads release in urban atmosphere nanoparticles of magnetite a ferromagnetic compound that contains Fe2+ and Fe3+ [84, 85]. They can enter the human brain through olfactory nerve and produce oxidative stress that can initiate neurodegeneration, process responsible for Alzheimer disease [86]. Al-NPs cause oxidative stress in brain vessels’ endothelial cells and alter the expression of tight-junction proteins [87]. Nanoparticles can deposit in other parts of the brain (hypothalamus, cerebellum, frontal cortex, brain stem, etc.) because of their structural characteristics that permit the passage at the synaptic junctions and through blood-brain barrier [88], leading to neuroinflammation, similar to that identified in Alzheimer disease [89]. Diesel NPs can pass rapidly into the circulatory system. They produce endothelial dysfunction at the microcirculation level, accumulate at inflammation sites, especially in atherosclerotic plaques [90], and are able to pass into the foetal circulation through placenta barrier, being considered teratogen factors [91]. Inhalation of diesel-emitted NPs stimulates the platelet aggregation [92] and may trigger thrombogenesis. They stimulate lipid peroxidation in the tissues (small intestine, liver, etc.) and in the plasma, the oxidation of HDL altering the protective role of this lipoprotein [93]. The inflammation, increased oxidative stress [94], vasoconstriction, or endothelium dysfunctions promoted by the NPs prolonged exposure can lead to atherosclerosis [95]. The exposure to atmospheric NPs initiates the mechanisms that lead to myocardial ischemia in patients with coronary diseases [96]. Atmospheric PM0.1 affects the blood flow into the vessels, decreasing the blood pressure [97] or increasing it [98], depending on the particulate matter and on the patient status. Nanoparticles can pass inside the cells and alter the functions of cellular proteins, cellular organelles and DNA [99]. Diesel nanoparticles damage the DNA through different mechanisms: direct attack on DNA, DNA oxidation, or inflammatory processes that generate excessive ROS with genotoxic effects [100]. The nanoparticles emitted by diesel engines or by other pollutant sources are able to initiate protein citrullination that leads to autoimmune diseases like collagen-induced arthritis [101].

Among the urban atmosphere nanoparticles, many are photochemically active (SiO2, ZnO, TiO2) and can produce exited electrons that can be transferred to the oxygen molecule, leading to superoxide radical (O2˙ˉ) [102]. Most of the NPs contain Fe, Ca, Si, Zn, Cr, components that trigger the oxidative stress through Fenton or Haber-Weiss-type reactions, with production of O2˙ˉ, OH˙ and 1O2˙(singlet oxygen) [103]. NPs can alter the function of proteins [104] and lipids. Ti-NPs have affinity for lipids, being accumulated in cellular membrane in big quantities that rupture the membrane. Inside the cell membrane, Ti-NPs are covered by lipids, proteins and tissue factor and move away from the initial location. Internalisation of the covered Ti-NPs stimulates the lysosomes enzymes to degrade the nanoparticles’ coat, letting the nanoparticles’ active surface to attack the lysosomal membrane, leading in the end to the death of the cell [105]. Like Ti-NPs, also Zn-NPs and Ce-NPs can be stored in the cell membrane or in the organelles and can initiate oxidative stress [106].

The presence of Fe-NPs, especially in the subway environment, stimulates the oxidative stress and the DNA lesions [107]. Fe-NPs penetrate easily inside the cells, target the endoplasmic reticulum and mitochondria and lead to ROS synthesis [108]. Ca-NPs are transported rapidly into the circulatory system and can bind plasma proteins [109]. Ultrafine particles can pass easily into the cell increasing the cellular calcium concentration that stimulates the release of cytokines [110], inflammatory molecules that stimulate the oxidative stress [111].

The same effects of NPs were seen on erythrocytes: easy penetration of ultrafine particles, increased calcium concentration inside the cytoplasm, oxidative stress, processes that lead to haemolysis [112]. PM0.1 exposure has effects also on white blood cells, producing an increase of monocytes concentration [113].


5. Conclusions

Urban atmospheric nanoparticles penetrate the human body and stimulate the oxidative stress in many organs leading to acute or chronic diseases, according to the time of exposure. The smaller nanoparticles penetrate easier inside the tissue cells, and their effects depend on the chemical composition, dimension, morphology, and on the reactive sites that are present on their surface. Urban atmosphere contains a complex mixture of different nanoparticles that are characteristic to specific urban locations. Prolonged exposure to high concentration of NPs in urban or industrial areas can lead to severe diseases or even death. New researches are required to complete the general view of the complex urban atmosphere.


Conflict of interest

The authors declare that there is no conflict of interest regarding the publication of this chapter.



ROSreactive oxygen species
NPsnanoparticles; particles less than 100 nm in diameter
PM0.1particulate matter less than 0.1 μm in diameter
CNScentral nervous system
HDLhigh-density lipoprotein


  1. 1. Mohnen V, Hidy GM. Measurements of atmospheric nanoparticles (1875-1980). BAMS. 2010;91(11):1525-1539. DOI: 10.1175/2010BAMS2929.1
  2. 2. Nel A, Xia T, Madler L, Li N. Toxic potential of materials at the nanolevel. Science. 2006;311(5761):622-627. DOI: 10.1126/science.1114397
  3. 3. Clarke JC, Owens SR, Zhou J. An ultrafine sea-salt flux from breaking waves: Implications for cloud condensation nuclei in the remote marine atmosphere. Journal of Geophysical Research D: Atmospheres. 2006;111(D6):1-2. DOI: 10.1029/2005JD006565
  4. 4. Zook HA. Spacecraft measurements of the cosmic dust flux. In: Peucker-Ehrenbrink B, Schmitz B, editors. Accretion of Extraterrestrial Matter Throughout Earth’s History. Boston: Springer; 2001. pp. 75-92. DOI: 10.1007/978-1-4419-8694-8
  5. 5. Holmes NS. A review of particle formation events and growth in the atmosphere in the various environments and discussion of mechanistic implications. Atmospheric Environment. 2007;25(Suppl. 1):2183-2201. DOI: 10.1016/j.atmosenv.2006.10.058
  6. 6. Tunved P, Hansson H, Kerminen V, Strom J, Dal Maso M, Lihavainen H, et al. High natural aerosol loading over boreal forests. Science. 2006;312(5771):261-263. DOI: 10.1126/science.1123052
  7. 7. Oberdörster G, Oberdörster E, Oberdörster J. Nanotoxicology: An emerging discipline evolving from studies of ultrafine particles. Environmental Health Perspectives. 2005;113(7):823-839. DOI: 10.1289/ehp.7339
  8. 8. Strambeanu N, Demetrovici L, Dragos D. Anthropogenic sources of nanoparticles. In: Lungu M, Neculae A, Bunoiu M, Biris C, editors. Nanoparticles’ Promises and Risks: Characterization, Manipulation, and Potential Hazards to Humanity and the Environment. Switzerland: Springer International Publishing; 2015. pp. 21-54. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-11728-7
  9. 9. Johnston MV, Klems JP, Zordan CA, Pennington MR, Smith JN, HEI Health Review Committee. Selective detection and characterisation of nanoparticles from motor vehicles. Research Report. Health Effects Institute. 2013;173:3-45
  10. 10. Slezakova K, Morais S, Pereira MC. Atmospheric nanoparticles and their impacts on public health. In: Rodriguez-Morales AJ, editor. Current Topics in Public Health. Rijeka, Croatia: IntechOpen; 2013. pp. 503-529. DOI: 10.5772/54775
  11. 11. Kumar P, Fennell BR. Measurements of particles in the 5-1000 nm range close to road level in an urban street canyon. Science of the Total Environment. 2008;390(2-3):437-447. DOI: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2007.10.013
  12. 12. Anastasio C, Martin ST. Atmospheric nanoparticles. Reviews in Mineralogy and Geochemistry. 2001;44(1):293-349. DOI: 10.2138/rmg.2001.44.08
  13. 13. Oberdörster G, Sharp Z, Atudorei V, Elder A, Gelein R, Kreyling W, et al. Translocation of inhaled ultrafine particles to the brain. Inhalation Toxicology. 2004;16(6-7):437-445. DOI: 10.1080/08958370490439597
  14. 14. Jędruszkiewicz J, Czernecki B, Marosz M. The variability of PM10 and PM2.5 concentrations in selected Polish agglomerations: The role of meteorological conditions, 2006-2016. IJEHR. 2017;27(6):441-462. DOI: 10.1080/09603123.2017.1379055
  15. 15. Giri D, Krishna Murthy V, Adhikary PR. The influence of meteorological conditions on PM10 concentrations in Kathmandu valley. International Journal of Environmental Research. 2008;2(1):49-60
  16. 16. Al Jallad F, Al Katheri E, Al Omar M. Concentrations of particulate matter and their relationships with meteorological variables. Sustainable Environment Research. 2013;23(3):191-198
  17. 17. Seinfeld JH, Pandis SN, editors. Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics: From Air Pollution to Climate Change. 2nd ed. Hoboken, New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons; 2006. pp. 19-55. ISBN 978-0-471-72018-8
  18. 18. Terzano C, Di Stefano F, Conti V, Graziani E, Petroianni A. Air pollution ultrafine particles: Toxicity beyond the lung. European Review for Medical and Pharmacological Sciences. 2010;14(10):809-821
  19. 19. Chow JC, Watson JG. Review of measurement methods and composition of ultrafine particles. Aerosol and Air Quality Research. 2007;7(2):121-173
  20. 20. Adachi K, Buseck PR. Hosted and free-floating metal-bearing atmospheric nanoparticles in Mexico City. Environmental Science & Technology. 2010;44:2299-2304. DOI: 10.1021/es902505b
  21. 21. Sanderson P, Delgado-Saborit JM, Harrison RM. A review of chemical and physical characterisation of atmospheric. Atmospheric Environment. 2014;94:353-365. DOI: 10.1016/j.atmosenv.2014.05.023
  22. 22. Miller AL, Stipe CB, Habjan MC, Ahlstrand GG. Role of lubrication oil in particulate emissions from a hydrogen-powered internal combustion engine. Environmental Science & Technology. 2007;41:6828-6835. DOI: 10.1021/es070999r
  23. 23. Cassee FR, Van Balen EC, Singh C, Green D, Muijser H, Weinstein J, et al. Exposure, health and ecological effects review of engineered nanoscale cerium and cerium oxide associated with its use as a fuel additive. Critical Reviews in Toxicology. 2011;41:213-229. DOI: 10.3109/10408444.2010.529105
  24. 24. Garg BD, Cadle SH, Mulawa PA, Groblicki PJ, Laroo C, Parr GA. Brake wear particulate matter emissions. Environmental Science & Technology. 2000;34:4463-4469. DOI: 10.1021/es001108h
  25. 25. Dahl A, Gharibi A, Swietlicki E, Gudmundsson A, Bohgard M, Ljungman A, et al. Traffic-generated emissions of ultrafine particles from pavement-tire interface. Atmospheric Environment. 2006;40:1314-1323. DOI: 10.1016/j.atmosenv.2005.10.029
  26. 26. Tissari J, Lyyränen J, Hytönen K, Sippula O, Tapper U, Frey A, et al. Fine particle and gaseous emissions from normal and smouldering wood combustion in a conventional masonry heater. Atmospheric Environment. 2008;42:7862-7873. DOI: 10.1016/j.atmosenv.2008.07.019
  27. 27. Lyyränen J, Jokiniemi J, Kauppinen EI, Joutsensaari J. Aerosol characterisation in medium-speed diesel engines operating with heavy fuel oils. Journal of Aerosol Science. 1999;30:771-784. DOI: 10.1016/S0021-8502(98)00763-0
  28. 28. Alander TJ, Leskinen AP, Raunemaa TM, Rantanen L. Characterization of diesel particles: Effects of fuel reformulation, exhaust aftertreatment, and engine operation on particle carbon composition and volatility. Environmental Science & Technology. 2004;38(9):2707-2714. DOI: 10.1021/es030129j
  29. 29. McLachlan MS, Kierkegaard A, Hansen KM, Van Egmond R, Christensen JH, Skjøth CA. Concentration and fate of decamethylcyclopentasiloxane (D5) in the Atmposphere. Environmental Science & Technology. 2010;44:5365-5370. DOI: 10.1021/es100411w
  30. 30. Bzdek BR, Horan AJ, Pennigton MR, Janechek NJ, Baek J, Stanier CO, et al. Silicon is a frequent component of atmospheric nanoparticles. Environmental Science & Technology. 2014;48:11137-11145. DOI: 10.1021/es5026933
  31. 31. Moreno T, Martins V, Querol X, Jones T, BéruBé K, Minguillón MC, et al. A new look at inhalable metalliferous airborne particles on rail subway platforms. Science of the Total Environment. 2015;505:367-375. DOI: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2014.10.013
  32. 32. Weber R, Marti JJ, McMurray P, Eisele FL, Tanner DJ, Jefferson A. Measured atmospheric new particle formation rates: Implications for nucleation mechanisms. Chemical Engeneering Communications. 1996;151(1):53-64. DOI: 10.1080/00986449608936541
  33. 33. Weber R, Marti JJ, McMurray P, Eisele FL, Tanner DJ, Jefferson A. Measurement of new particle formation and ultrafine particle growth rates at a clean continental site. Journal of Geophysical Research D: Atmospheres. 1997;102(4):4375-4386. DOI: 10.1029/96JD03656
  34. 34. Wang L, Khalizov AF, Zheng J, Xu W, Ma Y, Lal V, et al. Atmospheric nanoparticles formed from heterogenous reaction of organics. Nature Geoscience. 2010;3:238-242. DOI: 10.1038/NGEO778
  35. 35. Zhang KM, Wexler AS. Evolution of particle number distribution near roadways—Part I: Analysis of aerosol dynamics and its implications for engine emission measurement. Atmospheric Environment. 2004;38:6643-6653. DOI: 10.1016/j.atmosenv.2004.06.043
  36. 36. Wehner B, Birmili W, Gnauk T, Wiedensohler A. Particle number size distributions in a street canyon and their transformation into the urban air background: Measurements and a simple model study. Atmospheric Environment. 2002;36(13):2215-2223. DOI: 10.1016/S1352-2310(02)00174-7
  37. 37. Petroff A, Zhang L. Development and validation of a size-resolved particle dry deposition scheme for applications in aerosol transport models. Geoscientific Model Development. 2010;3(2):753-769. DOI: 10.5194/gmd-3-753-2010
  38. 38. Andronache C. Precipitation removal of ultrafine aerosol particles from the atmospheric boundary layer. Journal of Geophysical Research Atmospheres. 2004;109:D16S07. DOI: 10.1029/2003JD004050
  39. 39. Morawska L, Ristovski Z, Jayaratne ER, Keogh DU, Ling X. Ambient nano and ultrafine particles from motor vehicle emissions: Characteristics, ambient processing and implications on human exposure. Atmospheric Environment. 2008;42(35):8113-8138. DOI: 10.1016/j.atmosenv.2008.07.050
  40. 40. Van Dingenen R, Raes F, Putaud J-P, Baltensperger U, Charron A, Facchini M-C, et al. A European aerosol phenomenology—1: Physical characteristics of particulate matter at kerbside, urban, rural and background sites in Europe. Atmospheric Environment. 2004;38(16):2561-2577. DOI: 10.1016/j.atmosenv.2004.01.040
  41. 41. Kulmala M, Vehkamäki H, Petäjä T, Dal Maso M, Lauri A, Kerminen V-M, et al. Formation and growth rates of ultrafine atmospheric particles: A review of observations. Journal of Aerosol Science. 2004;35:143-176. DOI: 10.1016/j.jaerosci.2003.10.003
  42. 42. Pey J, Querol X, Alastuey A, Rodriguez S, Putaud JP, Van Dingenen R. Source apportionment of urban fine and ultra fine particle number concentration in a Western Mediterranean City. Atmospheric Environment. 2009;43(29):4407-4415. DOI: 10.1016/j.atmosenv.2009.05.024
  43. 43. Kumar P, Ketzel M, Vardoulakis S, Pirjola L, Britter R. Dynamics and dispersion modelling of nanoparticles from road traffic in the urban atmospheric environment—A review. Journal of Aerosol Science. 2011;42:580-603. DOI: 10.1016/j.jaerosci.2011.06.001
  44. 44. Harris SJ, Maricq MM. Signature size distribution for diesel and gasoline engine exhaust particulate matter. Journal of Aerosol Science. 2001;32(6):749-764. DOI: 10.1016/S0021-8502(00)00111-7
  45. 45. Graskow BR, Kittelson DB, Abdul-Khaleek IS, Ahmadi MR, Morris JE. Characterization of exhaust particulate emission from a spark ignition engine. SAE Special Publications. 1998;1326:155-165. DOI: 10.4271/980528
  46. 46. Kittelson DB, Watts WF, Johnson JP. Nanoparticle emission on Minnesota highways. Atmospheric Environment. 2004;38(1):9-19. DOI: 10.1016/j.atmosenv.2003.09.037
  47. 47. Gustafsson M, Blomqvist G, Gudmundsson A, Dahl A, Swietlicki E, Boghard M, et al. Properties and toxicological effects of particles from the interaction between tyres, road pavement and winter traction material. Science of the Total Environment. 2008;393(2-3):226-240. DOI: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2007.12.030
  48. 48. Bystrzejewska-Piotrowska G, Golimowski J, Urban PL. Nanoparticles: Their potential toxicity, waste and environmental management. Waste Management. 2009;29(9):2587-2595. DOI: 10.1016/j.wasman.2009.04.001
  49. 49. Genge MJ. Koronis asteroid dust within Antarctic ice. Geology. 2008;36(9):687-690. DOI: 10.1130/G24493A.1
  50. 50. Genge MJ, Larsen J, Van Ginneken M, Suttle MD. An urban collection of modern-day large micrometeorites: Evidence for variations in the extraterrestrial dust flux through the quaternary. Geology. 2017;45(2):119-122. DOI: 10.1130/G38352.1
  51. 51. Masciangioli T, Alper J. In: A Workshop Summary National Research Council, editor. Challenges in Characterizing Small Particles. Exploring Particles from the Nano- to Microscale. Washington DC: The National Academies Press; 2012. DOI: 10.17226/13317
  52. 52. Schneider IL, Teixeira EC, Oliveira LFS, Wiegand F. Atmospheric particle number concentration and size distribution in a traffic-impacted area. Atmospheric Pollution Research. 2015;6:877-885. DOI: 10.5094/APR.2015.097
  53. 53. Solazzo E, Cai X, Vardoulakis S. Modelling wind flow and vehicle-induced turbulence in urban streets. Atmospheric Environment. 2008;42:4918-4931. DOI: 10.1016%2Fj.atmosenv.2008.02.032
  54. 54. Xie X, Huang Z, Wang J, Xie Z. Thermal effects on vehicle emission dispersion in an urban street canyon. Transportation Research Part D. Transport and Environment. 2005;10:197-212. DOI: 10.1016/j.trd.2005.01.002
  55. 55. Gayev YA, Savory E. Influence of street obstructions on flow processes within urban canyons. Journal of Wind Engeneering and Industrial Aerodynamics. 1999;82:89-103. DOI: 10.1016/S0167-6105(98)00212-8
  56. 56. Goel A, Kumar P. Zone of influence for particle number concentrations at signalised traffic intersections. Atmospheric Environment. 2015;123:25-38. DOI: 10.1016/j.atmosenv.2015.10.054
  57. 57. Bari S, Naser J. Simulation of air flow and pollution levels caused by severe traffic jam in a road tunnel. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology. 2010;25(1):70-77. DOI: 10.1016/j.tust.2009.09.004
  58. 58. Cheng Y-H, Liu Z-S, Chen C-C. On-road measurements of ultrafine particle concentration profiles and their size distributions inside the longest highway tunnel in Southeast Asia. Atmospheric Environment. 2010;44(6):763-772. DOI: 10.1016/j.atmosenv.2009.11.040
  59. 59. Li Y, Xiang R. Particulate pollution in an underground car park in Wuhan, China. Particuology. 2013;11:94-98. DOI: 10.1016/j.partic.2012.06.010
  60. 60. Lee Y, Choi K, Jung W, Versoza ME, Barabad MLM, Kim T, et al. Generation characteristics of nanoparticles emitted from subways in operation. Aerosol and Air Quality Research. 2018;18:2230-2239. DOI: 10.4209/aaqr.2017.11.0439
  61. 61. Moreno T, Pérez N, Reche C, Martins V, de Miguel E, Capdevila M, et al. Subway platform air quality: Assessing the influences of tunnel ventilation, train piston effect and station design. Atmospheric Environment. 2014;92:461-468. DOI: 10.1016/j.atmosenv.2014.04.043
  62. 62. Loxham M, Cooper MJ, Gerlofs-Nijland ME, Cassee FR, Davies DE, Palmer MR, et al. Physicochemical characterization of airborne particulate matter at a mainline underground railway station. Environmental Science & Technology. 2013;47(8):3614-3622. DOI: 10.1021/es304481m
  63. 63. Brugge D, Durant JL, Rioux C. Near-highway pollutants in motor vehicle exhaust: A review of epidemiologic evidence of cardiac and pulmonary health risks. Environmental Health. 2007;6:23. DOI: 10.1186/1476-069X-6-23
  64. 64. Helland A, Kastenholtz H, Thidell A, Arnfalk P, Deppert K. Nanoparticulate material and regulatory policy in Europe: An analysis of stakeholder perspectives. Journal of Nanoparticle Research. 2006;8(5):709-719. DOI: 10.1007/s11051-006-9096-3
  65. 65. Clichici S, Filip A. In vivo assessment of Nanomaterials toxicity. In: Larramendy LM, Soloneski S, editors. Nanomaterials—Toxicity and Risk Assessment. Rijeka, Croatia: IntechOpen; 2015. pp. 93-121. DOI: 10.5772/60707
  66. 66. Rancan F, Gao Q , Graf C, Troppens S, Hadam S, Hackbarth S, et al. Skin penetration and cellular uptake of amorphous silica nanoparticles with variable size, surface functionalization, and colloidal stability. ACS Nano. 2012;6(8):6829-6842. DOI: 10.1021/nn301622h
  67. 67. Quignard S, Mosser G, Boissiere M, Coradin T. Long-term fate of silica nanoparticles interacting with human dermal fibroblasts. Biomaterials. 2012;33:4431-4442. DOI: 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2012.03.004
  68. 68. Nabeshi H, Yoshikawa T, Matsuyama K, Nakazato Y, Tochigi S, Kondoh S, et al. Amorphous nanosilica induce endocytosis dependent ROS generation and DNA damage in human keratinocytes. Particle and Fibre Toxicology. 2011;8(1):1-10. DOI: 10.1186/1743-8977-8-1
  69. 69. Lademann JM, Patzelt A, Richter H, Antoniou C, Sterry W, Knorr F. Determination of the cuticula thickness of human and porcine hairs and their potential influence on the penetration of nanoparticles into the hair follicles. Journal of Biomedical Optics. 2009;14(2):021014-1-021014-4. DOI: 10.1117/1.3078813
  70. 70. Qiao H, Liu W, Gu H, Wang D, Wang Y. The transport and deposition of nanoparticles in respiratory system by inhalation. Journal of Nanomaterials. 2015;2015:1-8. DOI: 10.1155/2015/394507
  71. 71. Nemmar A, Hoet PHM, Vanquickenborne B, Dinsdale D, Thomeer M, Hoyaerts MF, et al. Passage of inhaled particles into the blood circulation in humans. Circulation. 2002;105:411-414. DOI: 10.1161/hc0402.104118
  72. 72. Illum L, Davis SS, Müller RH, Mak E, West P. The organ distribution and circulation time of intravenously injected colloidal carriers sterically stabilized with a blockcopolymer—Poloxamine 908. Life Science. 1987;40(4):367-374. DOI: 10.1016/0024-3205(87)90138-x
  73. 73. Oranevski VN, Breus TK, Baevski RM, Rapoport SI, Petrov VM, Barsukova ZV. Effect of geomagnetic ctivity on the functional status of the body. Biofizika. 1998;43(5):819-826
  74. 74. Segré E. Chapter 3: K-electron capture by nuclei. In: Trower WP, editor. Discovering Alvarez: Selected Works of Luis W. Alvarez, with Commentary by his Students and Colleagues. Chicago IL USA: University of Chicago Press; 1987. pp. 11-12. ISBN-10: 0226813045
  75. 75. Mitrea DR, Mortazavi Moshkenani H, Hoteiuc OA, Bidian C, Toader AM, Clichici S. Antioxidant protection against cosmic radiation-induced oxidative stress at commercial flight altitude. Journal of Physiology and Pharmacology. 2018;69(4):1899-1905. DOI: 10.26402/jpp.2018.4.03
  76. 76. Stoupel EG. Cosmic ray (neutron) activity and air pollution nanoparticles-cardiovascular disease risk factors-separate or together? Journal of Basic and Clinical Physiology and Pharmacology. 2016;27(5):493-496. DOI: 10.1515/jbcpp-2015-0119
  77. 77. Dekant W, Klaunig JE. Toxicology of decamethylcyclopentasiloxane (D5). Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology. 2016;74(Suppl):S67-S76. DOI: 10.1016/j.yrtph.2015.06.011
  78. 78. Guarnieri M, Balmes JR. Outdoor air pollution and asthma. Lancet. 2014;383(9928):1581-1592. DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(14)60617-6
  79. 79. Lawless MW, O’Byrne KJ, Grayb SG. Oxidative stress induced lung cancer and COPD: Opportunities for epigenetic therapy. Journal of Cellular and Molecular Medicine. 2009;13(9a):2800-2821. DOI: 10.1111/j.1582-4934.2009.00845.x
  80. 80. Greim H, Borm P, Schins R, Do K. Toxicity of fibres and particles. Report of the workshop held in Munich, Germany, 26-27 October 2000. Inhalation Toxicology. 2001;13(9):737-754. DOI: 10.1080/08958370118273
  81. 81. Betzer O, Shilo M, Opochinsky R, Barnoy E, Motiei M, Okun E, et al. The effect of nanoparticle size on the ability to cross the blood–brain barrier: An in vivo study. Nanomedicine. 2017;12(13):1533-1546. DOI: 10.2217/nnm-2017-0022
  82. 82. Elder A, Gelein R, Silva V, Feikert T, Opanashuk L, Carter J, et al. Translocation of inhaled ultrafine manganese oxide particles to the central nervous system. Environmental Health Perspectives. 2006;114(8):1172-1178. DOI: 10.1289/ehp.9030
  83. 83. Wang Y, Tang M. Toxicity of diesel exhaust particles on central nervous system. Nanomedicine: NBM. 2018;14(5):1794. DOI: 10.1016/j.nano.2017.11.151
  84. 84. McClean RG, Kean WF. Contributions of wood ash magnetism to archaeomagnetic properties of fire pits and hearths. Earth and Planetary Science Letters. 1993;119(3):387-394. DOI: 10.1016/0012-821X(93)90146-Z
  85. 85. Kukutschová J, Moravec P, Tomášek V, Matějka V, Smolík J, Schwarz J, et al. On airborne nano/micro-sized wear particles released from low-metallic automotive brakes. Environmental Pollution. 2011;159(4):998-1006. DOI: 10.1016/j.envpol.2010.11.036
  86. 86. Maher BA, Ahmed IAM, Karloukovski V, MacLaren DA, Foulds PG, Allsop D, et al. Magnetite pollution nanoparticles in the human brain. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science. 2016;113(39):10797-10801. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1605941113
  87. 87. Chen L, Yokel RA, Henning B, Toborek M. Manufactured aluminium oxide nanoparticles decrease expression of tight junction proteins in brain vasculature. Journal of Neuroimmune Pharmacology. 2008;3:286-295. DOI: 10.1007/s11481-008-9131-5
  88. 88. Dorman DC, McManus BE, Parkinson CU, Manuel CA, McElveen AM, Everitt JI. Nasal toxicity of manganese sulfate and manganese phosphate in young male rats following subchronic (13-week) inhalation eposure. Inhalation Toxicology. 2004;16:481-488. DOI: 10.1080/08958370490439687
  89. 89. Calderón-Garcidueñas L, Reed W, Maronpot RR, Henríquez-Roldán C, Delgado-Chavez R, Calderón-Garcidueñas A, et al. Brain inflammation and Alzheimer’s-like pathology in individuals exposed to severe air pollution. Toxicologic Pathology. 2004;32:650-658. DOI: 10.1080/01926230490520232
  90. 90. Miller MR, Raftis JB, Langrish JP, McLean SG, Samutrtai P, Connell SP, et al. Inhaled nanoparticles accumulate at sites of vascular disease. ACS Nano. 2017;11:4542-4552. DOI: 10.1021/acsnano.6b08551
  91. 91. Keelan JA. Nanoparticles versus the placenta. Nature Nanotechnology. 2011;6(5):263-264. DOI: 10.1038/nnano.2011.65
  92. 92. Rajagopalan S, Al-Kindi SG, Brook RD. Air pollution and cardiovascular disease. JACC state-of-the-art review. Journal of the American College of Cardiology. 2018;72(17):2054-2070. DOI: 10.1016/j.jacc.2018.07.099
  93. 93. Yin F, Lawal A, Ricks J, Fox JR, Larson T, Navab M, et al. Diesel exhaust induces systemic lipid peroxidation and development of dysfunctional pro-oxidant and pro-inflammatory high-density lipoprotein. Arteriosclerosis, Thrombosis, and Vascular Biology. 2013;33:1153-1161. DOI: 10.1161/ATVBAHA.112.300552
  94. 94. Araujo JA, Barajas B, Kleinman M, Wang X, Bennett BJ, Gong KW, et al. Ambient particulate pollutants in the ultrafine range promote early atherosclerosis and systemic oxidative stress. Circulation Research. 2008;102:589-596. DOI: 10.1161/CIRCRESAHA.107.164970
  95. 95. Frampton MW, Stewart JC, Oberdörster G, Morrow PE, Chalupa D, Pietropaoli AP, et al. Inhalation of ultrafine particles alters blood leukocyte expression of adhesion molecules in humans. Environmental Health Perspectives. 2006;114(1):51-58. DOI: 10.1289/ehp.7962
  96. 96. Pekkanen J, Peters A, Hoek G, Tiitanen P, Brunekreef B, De Hartog J, et al. Particulate air pollution and risk of ST-segment depression during repeated submaximal exercise tests among subjects with coronary heart disease: The exposure and risk assessment for fine and ultrafine particles in ambient air (ULTRA) study. Circulation. 2002;106(8):933-938. DOI: 10.1161/01.CIR.0000027561.41736.3C
  97. 97. Ibald-Mulli A, Timonen KL, Peters A, Heinrich J, Wolke G, Lanki T, et al. Effects of particulate air pollution on blood pressure and heart rate in subjects with cardiovascular disease: A multicenter approach. Environmental Health Perspectives. 2004;112(3):369-377. DOI: 10.1289/ehp.6523
  98. 98. Sun Q , Yue P, Ying Z, Cardounel AJ, Brook RD, Devlin R, et al. Air pollution exposure potentiates hypertension through reactive oxygen species mediated activation of rho/ROCK. Arteriosclerosis, Thrombosis, and Vascular Biology. 2008;28(10):1760-1766. DOI: 10.1161/ATVBAHA.108.166967
  99. 99. Klein J. Probing the interactions of proteins and nanoparticles. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. 2007;104:2029-2030. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.0611610104
  100. 100. Dybdahl M, Risom L, Bornholdt J, Autrup H, Loft S, Wallin H. Inflammatory and genotoxic effects of diesel particles in vitro and in vivo. Mutation Research. 2004;562(1-2):119-131. DOI: 10.1016/j.mrgentox.2004.05.010
  101. 101. Mohamed BM, Verma NK, Davies AM, McGowan A, Crosbie-Staunton K, Prina-Mello A, et al. Citrullination of proteins: A common post-translational modification pathway induced by different nanoparticles in vitro and in vivo. Nanomedicine. 2012;7(8):1181-1195. DOI: 10.2217/nnm.11.177
  102. 102. Hoffmann M, Holtze EM, Wiesner MR. Reactive oxygen species generation on nanoparticulate material. In: Wiesner MR, Bottero JY, editors. Environmental Nanotechnology. Applications and Impacts of Nanomaterials. New York, USA: McGraw Hill; 2007. pp. 155-203. ISBN: 9780071477505
  103. 103. Knaapen AM, Borm PJA, Albrecht C, Schins RPF. Inhaled particles and lung cancer, part A: Mechanisms. International Journal of Cancer. 2004;109(6):799-809. DOI: 10.1002/ijc.11708
  104. 104. Saptarshi SR, Duschl A, Lopata AL. Interaction of nanoparticles with proteins: Relation to bio-reactivity of the nanoparticle. Journal of Nanobiotechnology. 2013;11(26):1-12. DOI: 10.1186/1477-3155-11-26
  105. 105. Urbančič I, Garvas M, Kokot B, Majaron H, Umek P, Cassidy H, et al. Nanoparticles can wrap epithelial cell membranes and relocate them across the epithelial cell layer. Nano Letters. 2018;18(8):5294-5305. DOI: 10.1021/acs.nanolett.8b02291
  106. 106. Buzea C, Pacheco I, Robbie K. Nanomaterials and nanoparticles: Sources and toxicity. Biointerphases. 2007;2(4):MR17-MR71. DOI: 10.1116/1.2815690
  107. 107. Jung MH, Kim HR, Park YJ, Park DS, Chung KH, Oh SM. Genotoxic effects and oxidative stress induced by organic extracts of particulate matter (PM 10) collected from a subway tunnel in Seoul, Korea. Mutation Research. 2012;749(1-2):39-47. DOI: 10.1016/j.mrgentox.2012.08.002
  108. 108. Park EJ, Umh HN, Choi DH, Cho MH, Choi W, Kim SW, et al. Magnetite- and maghemite-induced different toxicity in murine alveolar macrophage cells. Archives of Toxicology. 2014;88(8):1607-1618. DOI: 10.1007/s00204-014-1210-1
  109. 109. Lee JA, Kim MK, Kim HM, Lee JK, Jeong J, Kim YR, et al. The fate of calcium carbonate nanoparticles administered by oral route: Absorption and their interaction with biological matrices. International Journal of Nanomedicine. 2015;10:2272-2293. DOI: 10.2147/IJN.S79403
  110. 110. Mitrea DR, Clichici S, Filip A, Olteanu D, Baldea I, Moldovan R, et al. Resveratrol and loratadine effects on oxidative stress induced by experimental inflammation. Studia UBB Chemia. 2017;LXII(1):89-100. DOI: 10.24193/subbchem.2017.1.07
  111. 111. Yang D, Elner SG, Bian Z-M, Till GO, Petty HR, Elnera VM. Pro-inflammatory cytokines increase reactive oxygen species through mitochondria and NADPH oxidase in cultured RPE cells. Experimental Eye Research. 2007;85(4):462-472. DOI: 10.1016/j.exer.2007.06.013
  112. 112. Nemmar A, Beegam S, Yuvaraju P, Yasin J, Shahin A, Ali BH. Interaction of amorphous silica nanoparticles with erythrocytes in vitro: Role of oxidative stress. Cellular Physiology and Biochemistry. 2014;34:255-265. DOI: 10.1159/000362996
  113. 113. Malorni L, Langella MG, Iavicoli I, Pedata P. Role of ultrafine nanoparticles in lung cancer. Journal of Bioanalysis & Biomedicine. 2017;9(5):244-249. DOI: 10.4172/1948-593X.1000187

Written By

Daniela-Rodica Mitrea, Alina-Mihaela Toader and Oana-Alina Hoteiuc

Submitted: November 23rd, 2018 Reviewed: February 4th, 2019 Published: March 1st, 2019