Iseult Lynch

University of Birmingham
Geography, Earth and Environmental Science

University of Birmingham
Edgbaston
Birmingham
United Kingdom
B15 2TT
i.lynch@bham.ac.uk |  Visit Personal Website


Search Google Scholar
Search for Google Scholar Profile

Iseult Lynch (IL) is a physical chemist specialising in understanding the interface between enginnered nanomaterials and the environment (abiotic and biotic components) and how this determines their ultimate fate and behaviour. She has been actively involved in research to elucidate the mechanisms involved in potential toxicity of nanomaterials, including being centrally involved in the pioneering studies regarding the nanoparticle-protein corona, for which she received the US National Academy of Sciences Cozzarelli Prize for 2007 (along with her co-authors). This concept is now well-established as a key paradigm in understanding nanoparticle uptake by, distribution in, and impacts on living organisms and has been adopted as the basis for international centres for nanosafety. Since moving to University of Birmingham she has been developing the approaches for assessment of interactions of engineered nanoparticles with environmentally relevant macromolecules such as humic substances, which are much less well understood than proteins. She has acted as a government advisor on nanosafety and has played a major role in coordinating research on the safety of nanomaterials at European level, including Chairing EU NanoSafety Cluster Working Groups (www.nanosafetycluster.eu; Hazard, Databases, Dissemination) over the last 5 years, and co-editing the EU Nanosafety Cluster Research Roadmap for 2020. Her work has featured in both peer reviewed and popular literature, and has been cited over 7,000 times leading to a h-index of 39. She has been active in the translation of research to policy also, including co-authoring reports on the potential implications of nanomaterials in food for the Food Safety Authority of Ireland and the European Food Safety Authority, as well as papers on potential regulatory approaches for nanopesticides, a grouping and classification strategy for nanomaterials for safety evaluation and prediction and several other aspects of safe and responsible implementation of nanotechnologies.

Citation:
Kookana RS, Boxall AB, Reeves PT, Ashauer R, Beulke S, Chaudhry Q, Cornelis G, Fernandes TF, Gan J, Kah M, Lynch I, Ranville J, Sinclair C, Spurgeon D, Tiede K, Van den Brink PJ. J Agric Food Chem. 2014. "Nanopesticides: Guiding Principles for Regulatory Evaluation of Environmental Risks." 62 (19):4227-4240.
Abstract: Nanopesticides or nano plant protection products represent an emerging technological development that, in relation to pesticide use, could offer a range of benefits including increased efficacy, durability, and a reduction in the amounts of active ingredients that need to be used. A number of formulation types have been suggested including emulsions (e.g., nanoemulsions), nanocapsules (e.g., with polymers), and products containing pristine engineered nanoparticles, such as metals, metal oxides, and nanoclays. The increasing interest in the use of nanopesticides raises questions as to how to assess the environmental risk of these materials for regulatory purposes. Here, the current approaches for environmental risk assessment of pesticides are reviewed and the question of whether these approaches are fit for purpose for use on nanopesticides is addressed. Potential adaptations to existing environmental risk assessment tests and procedures for use with nanopesticides are discussed, addressing aspects such as analysis and characterization, environmental fate and exposure assessment, uptake by biota, ecotoxicity, and risk assessment of nanopesticides in aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems. Throughout, the main focus is on assessing whether the presence of the nanoformulation introduces potential differences relative to the conventional active ingredients. The proposed changes in the test methodology, research priorities, and recommendations would facilitate the development of regulatory approaches and a regulatory framework for nanopesticides.
DOI: 10.1021/jf500232f
Citation:
Godwin H, Nameth C, Avery D, Bergeson LL, Bernard D, Beryt E, Boyes W, Brown S, Clippinger AJ, Cohen Y, Doa M, Hendren CO, Holden P, Houck K, Kane AB, Klaessig F, Kodas T, Landsiedel R, Lynch I, Malloy T, Miller MB, Muller J, Oberdorster G, Petersen EJ, Pleus RC, Sayre P, Stone V, Sullivan KM, Tentschert J, Wallis P, Nel AE. 2015. "Nanomaterial Categorization for Assessing Risk Potential to Facilitate Regulatory Decision-Making." ACS Nano. 28 (4):3409-3417.
Abstract: For nanotechnology to meet its potential as a game-changing and sustainable technology, it is important to ensure that the engineered nanomaterials and nanoenabled products that gain entry to the marketplace are safe and effective. Tools and methods are needed for regulatory purposes to allow rapid material categorization according to human health and environmental risk potential, so that materials of high concern can be targeted for additional scrutiny, while material categories that pose the least risk can receive expedited review. Using carbon nanotubes as an example, we discuss how data from alternative testing strategies can be used to facilitate engineered nanomaterial categorization according to risk potential and how such an approach could facilitate regulatory decision-making in the future.
DOI: 10.1021/acsnano.5b00941
Citation:
Kai Savolainen, Ulrika Backman, Derk Brouwer, Bengt Fadeel, Teresa Fernandes, Thomas Kuhlbusch, Robert Landsiedel, Iseult Lynch, and Lea Pylkkänen. 2013. "Nanosafety in Europe 2015-2025: Towards Safe and Sustainable Nanomaterials and Nanotechnology Innovations."
Abstract: This document on the strategic priorities of nanosafety research during 2015-2025 has been produced as a joint effort of the European NanoSafety Cluster, a forum incorporating FP6 and FP7 funded nanosafety research projects. It also includes several nanosafety research projects, that have been funded by different EU Member States It identifies four major areas of research would greatly benefit our current understanding of ENM features, exposure to them, hazard mechanisms of ENM, as well as their risk assessment and management. Hence, the strategic vision on the future directions of European nanosafety research presented in this document may have a major impact on the future nanosafety research within and outside the European Union, and consequently, on the success of nanotechnologies.
URL: http://www.ttl.fi/en/publications/.../Nanosafety.../nanosafety_2015-2025.pdf
Citation:
"Scientific Opinion: The Potential Risks Arising from Nanoscience and Nanotechnologies on Food and Feed Safety. Scientific Opinion of the Scientific Committee." 2009. The EFSA Journal 958:1-39.
Abstract: This opinion addresses engineered nanomaterials (ENMs). Food and feed are addressed together, since the basic aspects (applications and potential impacts) are expected to be similar. This opinion is generic in nature and is in itself not a risk assessment of nanotechnologies as such or a survey of tentative applications or possible uses thereof or of specific products. The Scientific Committee makes a series of recommendations; in particular, actions should be taken to develop methods to detect and measure ENMs in food/feed and biological tissues, to survey the use of ENMs in the food/feed area, to assess the exposure in consumers and livestock, and to generate information on the toxicity of different ENMs.
URL: http://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/efsajournal/doc/958.pdf
Citation:
"The Relevance for Food Safety of Applications of Nanotechnology in the Food and Feed Industries." (2008). The Food Safety Authority of Ireland.
Abstract: This report provides an overview of current and potential applications of nanotechnology in the food industry, which may equally be applied in the feed industry. The possible risks of nanotechnology, together with the adequacy of the existing EU regulatory framework in the control of any potential risks, are also examined with a view to determining what further legislative measures, if any, may be necessary to safeguard food safety. This report notes that nanoparticles are already naturally present in food, given that many food and feed ingredients are comprised of endogenous proteins, carbohydrates and fats with sizes extending from large biopolymers (macromolecules) down to the nanoscale.The applications of nanotechnology in food production reviewed in this report must therefore be viewed in the context of this background exposure to natural nanoparticles in the diet.
URL: http://www.fsai.ie/nanotechologyandfood.html
Citation:
Linkov I, Steevens J, Adlakha-Hutcheon G, Bennett E, Chappell M, Colvin V, Davis JM, Davis T, Elder A, Foss Hansen S, Hakkinen PB, Hussain SM, Karkan D, Korenstein R, Lynch I, Metcalfe C, Ramadan AB, Satterstrom FK. 2009. "Emerging Methods and Tools for Environmental Risk Assessment, Decision-Making, and Policy for Nanomaterials: Summary of NATO Advanced Research Workshop." J Nanopart Res. 11:513-527.
Abstract: Nanomaterials and their associated technologies hold promising opportunities for the development of new materials and applications in a wide variety of disciplines, including medicine, environmental remediation, waste treatment, and energy conservation. However, current information regarding the environmental effects and health risks associated with nanomaterials is limited and sometimes contradictory. This article summarizes the conclusions of a 2008 NATO workshop designed to evaluate the wide-scale implications (e.g., benefits, risks, and costs) of the use of nanomaterials on human health and the environment. A unique feature of this workshop was its interdisciplinary nature and focus on the practical needs of policy decision makers. Workshop presentations and discussion panels were structured along four main themes: technology and benefits, human health risk, environmental risk, and policy implications. Four corresponding working groups (WGs) were formed to develop detailed summaries of the state-of-the-science in their respective areas and to discuss emerging gaps and research needs. The WGs identified gaps between the rapid advances in the types and applications of nanomaterials and the slower pace of human health and environmental risk science, along with strategies to reduce the uncertainties associated with calculating these risks.
URL: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19655050
Citation:
Bouwmeester H, Lynch I, Marvin HJ, Dawson KA, Berges M, Braguer D, Byrne HJ, Casey A, Chambers G, Clift MJ, Elia G, Fernandes TF, Fjellsbø LB, Hatto P, Juillerat L, Klein C, Kreyling WG, Nickel C, Riediker M, Stone V. 2011. "Minimal Analytical Characterization of Engineered Nanomaterials Needed for Hazard Assessment in Biological Matrices." Nanotoxicology 5:1-11.
Abstract: This paper presents the outcomes from a workshop of the European Network on the Health and Environmental Impact of Nanomaterials (NanoImpactNet). During the workshop, 45 experts in the field of safety assessment of engineered nanomaterials addressed the need to systematically study sets of engineered nanomaterials with specific metrics to generate a data set which would allow the establishment of dose-response relations. The group concluded that international cooperation and worldwide standardization of terminology, reference materials and protocols are needed to make progress in establishing lists of essential metrics. High quality data necessitates the development of harmonized study approaches and adequate reporting of data. Priority metrics can only be based on well-characterized dose-response relations derived from the systematic study of the bio-kinetics and bio-interactions of nanomaterials at both organism and (sub)-cellular levels. In addition, increased effort is needed to develop and validate analytical methods to determine these metrics in a complex matrix.
DOI: 10.3109/17435391003775266.
Citation:
Stone D, Harper BJ, Lynch I, Dawson K, Harper SL. 2010 "Exposure Assessment: Recommendations for Nanotechnology-Based Pesticides." 16:467-474.
Abstract: Given the development of nanotechnology within numerous scientific disciplines, it is likely that nanoscale products have been and will be used for agricultural, vector, and urban pest control prior to a complete evaluation of exposure and risk. Significant differences may exist between nanotechnology-based pesticides (NBPs) and conventional pesticides, primarily due to size and surface characteristics. These differences may result in changes in bioavailability, sensitivity, dosimetry, and pharmacokinetics. This paper considers the role of exposure assessment in the regulation of NBPs. While the existing regulatory infrastructure for pesticides is well established, several issues specific to NBP exposure are discussed, including: (1) disclosures of nanoparticle characteristics in product formulations; (2) additional uncertainty factors for NBPs with inadequate data; (3) route-specific approaches for assessing exposure; (4) testing with the commercial form of NBPs; (5) initiation of a health surveillance program; and (6) development of educational programs.
DOI: 10.1179/107735210799160066
Citation:
Stefaniak AB, Hackley VA, Roebben G, Ehara K, Hankin S, Postek MT, Lynch I, Fu WE, Linsinger TP, Thünemann AF. 2013. “Nanoscale Reference Materials for Environmental, Health and Safety Measurements: Needs, Gaps and Opportunities.” Nanotoxicology. 7:1325-1337.
Abstract: 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.
DOI: 10.3109/17435390.2012.739664
Citation:
Schütz, C.A., L. Juillerat-Jeanneret, H. Mueller, I. Lynch and M. Riediker. 2013 “Therapeutic Nanoparticles in Clinics and Under Clinical Evaluation.” Nanomedicine 8:449-467. London.
Abstract: This article reviews nanoparticulate-chemotherapeutic systems that have been developed for human therapy, considering the components of the nanoparticles, the therapeutic agents associated with the nanoparticles and the clinical indications these therapeutic nanoparticles have been developed for. In this evaluation we have put into perspective the types of nanomaterials and their therapeutic indications. We have reviewed the nanoparticulate-chemotherapeutic systems that have been published, approved and marketed and that are currently in clinical use. We have also analyzed the nanoparticulate-chemotherapeutic systems that are in clinical trials and under preclinical development.
DOI: 10.2217/nnm.13.8
Citation:
Kookana RS, Boxall AB, Reeves PT, Ashauer R, Beulke S, Chaudhry Q, Cornelis G, Fernandes TF, Gan J, Kah M, Lynch I, Ranville J, Sinclair C, Spurgeon D, Tiede K, Van den Brink PJ. 2014. "Nanopesticides: Guiding Principles for Regulatory Evaluation of Environmental Risks." J Agric Food Chem. 62:4227-4240.
Abstract: Nanopesticides or nano plant protection products represent an emerging technological development that, in relation to pesticide use, could offer a range of benefits including increased efficacy, durability, and a reduction in the amounts of active ingredients that need to be used. A number of formulation types have been suggested including emulsions (e.g., nanoemulsions), nanocapsules (e.g., with polymers), and products containing pristine engineered nanoparticles, such as metals, metal oxides, and nanoclays. The increasing interest in the use of nanopesticides raises questions as to how to assess the environmental risk of these materials for regulatory purposes. Here, the current approaches for environmental risk assessment of pesticides are reviewed and the question of whether these approaches are fit for purpose for use on nanopesticides is addressed. Potential adaptations to existing environmental risk assessment tests and procedures for use with nanopesticides are discussed, addressing aspects such as analysis and characterization, environmental fate and exposure assessment, uptake by biota, ecotoxicity, and risk assessment of nanopesticides in aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems. Throughout, the main focus is on assessing whether the presence of the nanoformulation introduces potential differences relative to the conventional active ingredients. The proposed changes in the test methodology, research priorities, and recommendations would facilitate the development of regulatory approaches and a regulatory framework for nanopesticides.
DOI: 10.1021/jf500232f

Substantive Focus:
Energy and Natural Resource Policy
Environmental Policy SECONDARY
Governance
Science and Technology Policy PRIMARY

Theoretical Focus:
Agenda-Setting, Adoption, and Implementation PRIMARY
Policy Analysis and Evaluation SECONDARY

Keywords

NANOSAFETY NANOREGULATION NEW TECHNOLOGIES RESPONSIBLE INNOVATION ECOLOGICAL IMPACTS ECOSYSTEMS SERVICES NANO GOVERNANCE BIONANO INTERFACE NANOQSARS