Metadata stewardship in nanosafety research: learning from the past, preparing for an "on-the-fly" FAIR future

Introduction: Significant progress has been made in terms of best practice in research data management for nanosafety. Some of the underlying approaches to date are, however, overly focussed on the needs of specific research projects or aligned to a single data repository, and this “silo” approach is hampering their general adoption by the broader research community and individual labs. Methods: State-of-the-art data/knowledge collection, curation management FAIRification, and sharing solutions applied in the nanosafety field are reviewed focusing on unique features, which should be generalised and integrated into a functional FAIRification ecosystem that addresses the needs of both data generators and data (re)users. Results: The development of data capture templates has focussed on standardised single-endpoint Test Guidelines, which does not reflect the complexity of real laboratory processes, where multiple assays are interlinked into an overall study, and where non-standardised assays are developed to address novel research questions and probe mechanistic processes to generate the basis for read-across from one nanomaterial to another. By focussing on the needs of data providers and data users, we identify how existing tools and approaches can be re-framed to enable “on-the-fly” (meta) data definition, data capture, curation and FAIRification, that are sufficiently flexible to address the complexity in nanosafety research, yet harmonised enough to facilitate integration of datasets from different sources generated for different research purposes. By mapping the available tools for nanomaterials safety research (including nanomaterials characterisation, non-standard (mechanistic-focussed) methods, measurement principles and experimental setup, environmental fate and requirements from new research foci such as safe and sustainable by design), a strategy for integration and bridging between silos is presented. The NanoCommons KnowledgeBase has shown how data from different sources can be integrated into a one-stop shop for searching, browsing and accessing data (without copying), and thus how to break the boundaries between data silos. Discussion: The next steps are to generalise the approach by defining a process to build consensus (meta)data standards, develop solutions to make (meta)data more machine actionable (on the fly ontology development) and establish a distributed FAIR data ecosystem maintained by the community beyond specific projects. Since other multidisciplinary domains might also struggle with data silofication, the learnings presented here may be transferable to facilitate data sharing within other communities and support harmonization of approaches across disciplines to prepare the ground for cross-domain interoperability. Visit WorldFAIR online at http://worldfair-project.eu. WorldFAIR is funded by the EC HORIZON-WIDERA-2021-ERA-01-41 Coordination and Support Action under Grant Agreement No. 101058393

Metadata stewardship in nanosafety research: learning from the past, preparing for an "on-the-fly" FAIR future

Introduction: Significant progress has been made in terms of best practice in research data management for nanosafety. Some of the underlying approaches to date are, however, overly focussed on the needs of specific research projects or aligned to a single data repository, and this "silo" approach is hampering their general adoption by the broader research community and individual labs.Methods: State-of-the-art data/knowledge collection, curation management FAIrification, and sharing solutions applied in the nanosafety field are reviewed focusing on unique features, which should be generalised and integrated into a functional FAIRification ecosystem that addresses the needs of both data generators and data (re)users.Results: The development of data capture templates has focussed on standardised single-endpoint Test Guidelines, which does not reflect the complexity of real laboratory processes, where multiple assays are interlinked into an overall study, and where non-standardised assays are developed to address novel research questions and probe mechanistic processes to generate the basis for read-across from one nanomaterial to another. By focussing on the needs of data providers and data users, we identify how existing tools and approaches can be re-framed to enable "on-the-fly" (meta) data definition, data capture, curation and FAIRification, that are sufficiently flexible to address the complexity in nanosafety research, yet harmonised enough to facilitate integration of datasets from different sources generated for different research purposes. By mapping the available tools for nanomaterials safety research (including nanomaterials characterisation, nonstandard (mechanistic-focussed) methods, measurement principles and experimental setup, environmental fate and requirements from new research foci such as safe and sustainable by design), a strategy for integration and bridging between silos is presented. The NanoCommons KnowledgeBase has shown how data from different sources can be integrated into a one-stop shop for searching, browsing and accessing data (without copying), and thus how to break the boundaries between data silos.Discussion: The next steps are to generalise the approach by defining a process to build consensus (meta)data standards, develop solutions to make (meta)data more machine actionable (on the fly ontology development) and establish a distributed FAIR data ecosystem maintained by the community beyond specific projects. Since other multidisciplinary domains might also struggle with data silofication, the learnings presented here may be transferrable to facilitate data sharing within other communities and support harmonization of approaches across disciplines to prepare the ground for cross-domain interoperability

Metadata stewardship in nanosafety research: learning from the past, preparing for an “on-the-fly” FAIR future

Introduction: Significant progress has been made in terms of best practice in research data management for nanosafety. Some of the underlying approaches to date are, however, overly focussed on the needs of specific research projects or aligned to a single data repository, and this “silo” approach is hampering their general adoption by the broader research community and individual labs.Methods: State-of-the-art data/knowledge collection, curation management FAIrification, and sharing solutions applied in the nanosafety field are reviewed focusing on unique features, which should be generalised and integrated into a functional FAIRification ecosystem that addresses the needs of both data generators and data (re)users.Results: The development of data capture templates has focussed on standardised single-endpoint Test Guidelines, which does not reflect the complexity of real laboratory processes, where multiple assays are interlinked into an overall study, and where non-standardised assays are developed to address novel research questions and probe mechanistic processes to generate the basis for read-across from one nanomaterial to another. By focussing on the needs of data providers and data users, we identify how existing tools and approaches can be re-framed to enable “on-the-fly” (meta) data definition, data capture, curation and FAIRification, that are sufficiently flexible to address the complexity in nanosafety research, yet harmonised enough to facilitate integration of datasets from different sources generated for different research purposes. By mapping the available tools for nanomaterials safety research (including nanomaterials characterisation, nonstandard (mechanistic-focussed) methods, measurement principles and experimental setup, environmental fate and requirements from new research foci such as safe and sustainable by design), a strategy for integration and bridging between silos is presented. The NanoCommons KnowledgeBase has shown how data from different sources can be integrated into a one-stop shop for searching, browsing and accessing data (without copying), and thus how to break the boundaries between data silos.Discussion: The next steps are to generalise the approach by defining a process to build consensus (meta)data standards, develop solutions to make (meta)data more machine actionable (on the fly ontology development) and establish a distributed FAIR data ecosystem maintained by the community beyond specific projects. Since other multidisciplinary domains might also struggle with data silofication, the learnings presented here may be transferrable to facilitate data sharing within other communities and support harmonization of approaches across disciplines to prepare the ground for cross-domain interoperability

Environmental, health and safety aspects of nanotechnology—implications for the R&D in (small) companies

The growth of nanotechnology has led to an unprecedented research and development effort in both the public and the private sectors; world wide, an increasing number of laboratories, fabrication and manufacturing plants develop or apply novel nanometre-sized materials for applications ranging from large-scale industrial materials, to electronic components and healthcare and medical products; an increasing number of start-ups have been launched to establish their nanotechnology-based products in a trillion-dollar market.Very little, however, is known about the interaction of man-made nanostructured materials and living organisms, as studies of nanotoxicology are gaining increasing interest, but are still in their infancy. Despite the formation of many focus and lobbying groups, proper legislation of the environmental, health and safety aspects of nanotechnology will take years to be implemented. In the mean time, it is of utmost importance that companies working with nanometre-sized matter take appropriate precautions to protect their staff, the environment and the customer. Toxicology tests and agency approval of new nanometre-sized materials are prohibitively expensive, but, even if working on a tight budget, nanotechnology companies can achieve an ethical and safe business conduct via a number of possible routes

Nanomaterials and regulation of cosmetics

status: publishe

Phenotypic, Morphological and Adhesive Differences of Human Hematopoietic Progenitor Cells Cultured on Murine versus Human Mesenchymal Stromal Cells

Xenogenic transplantation models have been developed to study human hematopoiesis in immunocompromised murine recipients. They still have limitations and therefore it is important to delineate all players within the bone marrow that could account for species-specific differences. Here, we evaluated the proliferative capacity, morphological and physical characteristics of human CD34+ hematopoietic stem and progenitor cells (HSPCs) after co-culture on murine or human bone marrow-derived mesenchymal stromal cells (MSCs). After seven days, human CD34+CD133– HSPCs expanded to similar extents on both feeder layers while cellular subsets comprising primitive CD34+CD133+ and CD133+CD34– phenotypes are reduced fivefold on murine MSCs. The number of migrating HSPCs was also reduced on murine cells suggesting that MSC adhesion influences cellular polarization of HSPC. We used atomic force microscopy-based single-cell force spectroscopy to quantify their adhesive interactions. We found threefold higher detachment forces of human HSPCs from murine MSCs compared to human ones. This difference is related to the N-cadherin expression level on murine MSCs since its knockdown abolished their differential adhesion properties with human HSPCs. Our observations highlight phenotypic, morphological and adhesive differences of human HSPCs when cultured on murine or human MSCs, which raise some caution in data interpretation when xenogenic transplantation models are used