Abstract
The effect of nickel nanoparticles (NiNPs) on the bioaccumulation of essential and toxic chemical elements in the organs of rats after oral administration is evaluated. Wistar rats receive Ni in the form of a soluble salt (basic Ni carbonate) or two types of NiNPs with average diameters of 53.7 and 70.9 nm in doses of 0.1, 1.0, and 10 mg/kg body weight in terms of nickel for 92 days in the composition of the diet consumed. The content of Ni as well as Ag, Al, As, B, Ba, Be, Ca, Cd, Ce, Co, Cr, Cs, Cu, Fe, Ga, Gd, K, La, Mg, Mn, Na, Pb, Rb, Se, Sr, Tl, V, and Zn is determined in the liver, kidneys, and spleen by inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry. The content of Ni in the kidneys and brain increases under the influence of both the salt and NPs; in the liver and gonads, only after the introduction of the salt form, but not with NPs; in the spleen the level of Ni does not increase upon the intake of all Ni forms. In rats receiving NiNPs various changes are observed in indicators of trace-element homeostasis, including the increased bioaccumulation of Pb in the liver, gonads, and brain, As in the spleen, and Al in the liver and brain; inhibition of the accumulation of Mg, Mn, and Sr in the kidney and Ba in the kidneys and spleen. The content of Ca under the influence of NPs increased in the kidneys, but decreased in the gonads. A number of effects arising from the administration of Ni in the nanoform to animals are absent or have the opposite sign in the case of salt-form administration. NiNPs have little effect on the bioaccumulation of Cu, Fe, Zn, Se, Mg, and K. The effects demonstrated by the administration of NiNPs to animals can be considered as manifestations of nanometallomic patterns, i.e., processes mediated by changes in the gene expression of metalloproteins caused by NPs or products of their biological transformation.
![](http://media.springernature.com/m312/springer-static/image/art%3A10.1134%2FS263516762360102X/MediaObjects/12201_2024_10554_Fig1_HTML.png)
![](http://media.springernature.com/m312/springer-static/image/art%3A10.1134%2FS263516762360102X/MediaObjects/12201_2024_10554_Fig2_HTML.png)
![](http://media.springernature.com/m312/springer-static/image/art%3A10.1134%2FS263516762360102X/MediaObjects/12201_2024_10554_Fig3_HTML.png)
REFERENCES
T. H. Shin, S. Nithiyanandam, D. Y. Lee, et al., Nanomaterials 11, 2385 (2021). https://doi.org/10.3390/nano11092385
L. Wang, J. Zhao, L. Cui, et al., Metallomics 13, mfab013 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1093/mtomcs/mfab013
F. Benetti, L. Bregoli, I. Olivato, and E. Sabbioni, Metallomics 6, 729 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1039/c3mt00167a
A. A. Shumakova, I. V. Gmoshinski, V. A. Shipelin, et al., Nanotechnologies in Russia 13, 189 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1134/S1995078018020155
A. A. Shumakova, I. V. Gmoshinski, S. A. Khotimchenko, and E. N. Trushina, IOP Conf. Ser.: Mater. Sci. Eng. 98, 012043 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1088/1757-899X/98/1/012043
D. Lei, D. C. Lee, A. Magasinski, et al., ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 8, 2088 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1021/acsami.5b10547
P. Zhang, L. Wang, S. Yang, et al., Nat. Commun. 8, 15020 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms15020
S. Borowska and M. M. Brzoska, J. Appl. Toxicol. 35, 551 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1002/jat.3129
G. Elango, S. M. Roopan, K. I. Dhamodaran, et al., J. Photochem. Photobiol., B 162, 162 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jphotobiol.2016.06.045
B. Katsnelson, L. Privalova, M. P. Sutunkova, et al., Int. J. Nanomed. 10, 3013 (2015). https://doi.org/10.2147/IJN.S80843
R. Magaye and J. Zhao, Environ. Toxicol. Pharmacol. 34, 644 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.etap.2012.08.012
A. Ali, M. Suhail, S. Mathew, et al., J. Nanosci. Nanotechnol. 16, 40 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1166/jnn.2016.10885
V. A. Shipelin, A. A. Shumakova, E. N. Trushina, et al., Nanomaterials (Basel) 12, 3523 (2022).https://doi.org/10.3390/nano12193523
Committee for the Update of the Guide for the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals; Institute for Laboratory Animal Research (ILAR); Division on Earth and Life Studies (DELS); National Research Council of the National Academies, Guide for the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals, 8th ed. (National Academies Press, Washington, D.C., 2011).
A. A. Shumakova, V. A. Shipelin, E. V. Leontyeva, and I. V. Gmoshinski, Biol. Trace Elem. Res. 200, 281 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12011-021-02642-0
W. Begum, S. Rai, S. Banerjee, et al., RSC Adv. 12, 9139 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1039/d2ra00378c
A. Graff, E. Barrez, P. Baranek, et al., J. Solution Chem. 46, 25 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10953-016-0555-x
F. Ogata, N. Nagai, M. Toda, et al., Chem. Pharm. Bull. (Tokyo) 67, 487 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1248/cpb.c19-00037
J. R. Pietruska, X. Liu, A. Smith, et al., Toxicol. Sci. 124, 138 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1093/toxsci/kfr206
L. **, Z. Ke, X. Benqiong, and W. Qun, Biometals 17, 157 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1023/b:biom.0000018373.85342.36
M. B. Virgolini and M. Aschner, Adv. Neurotoxicol. 5, 159 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1016/bs.ant.2020.11.002
P. G. Hogan, L. Chen, J. Nardone, and A. Rao, Genes Dev. 17, 2205 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1101/gad.1102703
T. Cai, X. Li, J. Ding, et al., Curr. Cancer. Drug. Targets 11, 548 (2011). https://doi.org/10.2174/156800911795656001
C. Huang, J. Li, M. Costa, et al., Cancer Res. 61, 8051 (2001).
GeneMANIA. https://genemania.org/
M. Dey and R. K. Singh, Pharmacol. Rep. 74, 439 (2022).
G. de Paula Arrifano, M. E. Crespo-Lopez, A. Lopes-Araújo, et al., Neurochem. Res. 48, 1047 (2023).
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
We thank A.G. Masyutin (Faculty of Biology, Moscow State University) for the preparation of electron-microscopy images of the nanoparticles.
Funding
This study was supported by a State Task grant (Basic Research Program, Ministry of Science and Higher Education of the Russian Federation, no. 0529-2019-0057).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
ETHICS APPROVAL AND CONSENT TO PARTICIPATE
Statement on the welfare of animals. The work was performed in accordance with the rules of good laboratory practice and international recommendations for the humane treatment of animals [14] and according to the MU 1.2.2520-09 guidelines “Toxicological and hygienic safety assessment of nanomaterials.” The design of the experiment was approved by the Ethics Committee of the Federal Research Centre of Nutrition, Biotechnology and Food Safety (protocol no. 7 of September 17, 2021). All applicable international, national, and/or institutional guidelines for the care and use of animals were followed.
CONFLICT OF INTEREST
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Additional information
Translated by M. Novikova
Publisher’s Note.
Pleiades Publishing remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Supplementary Information
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Shumakova, A.A., Kolobanov, A.I., Shipelin, V.A. et al. Effect of Orally Introduced Nickel Nanoparticles on the Trace Element Content in the Internal Organs of Rats. Nanotechnol Russia 18, 960–970 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1134/S263516762360102X
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1134/S263516762360102X