Ke Mingyan, Zhang Keshuo, Hicks Andrea L, Wu Fan, You Jing
College of Environment and Climate, Guangdong Provincial Key Laboratory of Environmental Pollution and Health, Jinan University, Guangzhou, 511443, China.
Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI, 53706, USA.
Environ Sci Ecotechnol. 2025 May 2;25:100565. doi: 10.1016/j.ese.2025.100565. eCollection 2025 May.
Conventional ecological risk assessments prioritize downstream anthropogenic impacts, overlooking risks arising from upstream processes involving highly hazardous substances and indirect emissions. This narrow focus obscures high-risk hotspots and renders traditional methodologies ill-suited for evaluating novel chemical entities. Nanopesticides, designed for targeted delivery of pesticidal active ingredients, are increasingly deployed to enhance efficiency, yet their altered environmental fate and transport dynamics may reshape end-of-life risks while their full lifecycle impacts remain uncharacterized. Here, we address this gap using imidacloprid (IMI) and its nano-encapsulated variant (nano-IMI) as case studies. By applying life cycle assessment and integrating the USEtox ecotoxicity model with the nano-specific SimpleBox4Nano framework, we quantify "cradle-to-gate" environmental impacts and derive substance-specific ecotoxicity metrics, enabling systematic characterization of end-of-life risks associated with these formulations. Production-stage ecological risks of nano-IMI (4.63 × 10 CTUe) are approximately four times greater than those for conventional IMI (1.18 × 10 CTUe). However, end-of-life freshwater ecological risks from nano-IMI emissions (0.012-6.93 × 10 CTUe) are 2-5 orders of magnitude lower compared with IMI (1.59 × 10-6.13 × 10 CTUe), accounting for rainfall variability, toxicity data selection, fate, and environmental transport scenarios. Under equivalent rainfall conditions, nano-IMI exhibited up to three orders of magnitude lower integrated life-cycle freshwater ecological risks, underscoring its potential as an environmentally preferable alternative to conventional IMI. This research introduces a comprehensive and novel methodology for evaluating engineered nanomaterial alternatives across realistic environmental scenarios, providing essential insights into nanopesticide risk assessment throughout their lifecycle.
传统的生态风险评估将重点放在下游的人为影响上，而忽视了上游涉及高危险物质和间接排放的过程所产生的风险。这种狭隘的关注点掩盖了高风险热点地区，使传统方法不适用于评估新型化学实体。纳米农药旨在有针对性地输送农药活性成分，越来越多地被用于提高效率，但其环境归宿和迁移动态的改变可能会重塑生命周期结束时的风险，而其整个生命周期的影响仍未得到充分描述。在这里，我们以吡虫啉（IMI）及其纳米封装变体（纳米IMI）为案例研究来填补这一空白。通过应用生命周期评估，并将USEtox生态毒性模型与纳米特定的SimpleBox4Nano框架相结合，我们量化了“从摇篮到大门”的环境影响，并得出特定物质的生态毒性指标，从而能够系统地描述与这些制剂相关的生命周期结束时的风险。纳米IMI生产阶段的生态风险（4.63×10 CTUe）大约比传统IMI（1.18×10 CTUe）大四倍。然而，纳米IMI排放产生的生命周期结束时的淡水生态风险（0.012 - 6.93×10 CTUe）与IMI（1.59×10 - 6.13×10 CTUe）相比低2 - 5个数量级，这考虑了降雨变化、毒性数据选择、归宿和环境迁移情景。在同等降雨条件下，纳米IMI的综合生命周期淡水生态风险低达三个数量级，突出了其作为传统IMI在环境方面更优替代品的潜力。本研究引入了一种全面且新颖的方法，用于评估跨现实环境情景的工程纳米材料替代品，为纳米农药在其整个生命周期的风险评估提供了重要见解。
