<p> SUPPLEMENTAL DATA</p><p>Effects of CeO2 nanoparticles on terrestrial isopod Porcellio scaber: comparison of CeO2 biological potential with other nanoparticles</p><p>Olga Malev†, Polonca Trebše†, Małgorzata Piecha†, Sara Novak*‡, Bojan Budič§, Miroslav D. </p><p>Dramićaninǁ, Damjana Drobne‡</p><p>† University of Nova Gorica, 5000 Nova Gorica, Slovenia</p><p>‡ Department of Biology, Biotechnical Faculty, University of Ljubljana, 1000 Ljubljana, </p><p>Slovenia</p><p>§National Institute of Chemistry, 1001 Ljubljana, Slovenia</p><p>ǁInstitute of Nuclear Sciences - Vinča, 11000 Beograd, Serbia</p><p>*Corresponding author * Address correspondence to [email protected]</p><p>Table S1: Selected comparative toxicity data of metallic or metal oxide NPs tested on earthworms (Eisenia sp. and Lumbricus sp.) with same exposure duration and mode.</p><p>NPs Exposure duration/mode Exposure concentration Reproduction References –1 -1 CeO2 56 days 41–10 000 mg Ce kg soil EC50 > 10 000 mg Ce kg [15]</p><p>- -1 dosed natural soil (50.3-12 283 mg CeO2 kg (12 283 mg CeO2) kg</p><p>1soil )</p><p>Ag 56 days 15; 30; 60; 120 and 200 EC50 = 74.3-80 mg Ag [16]</p><p> dosed natural sand soil mg Ag kg-1 soil kg-1 56 days 10; 100; and 1000 mg Ag LOEC = 773-801 mg Ag [18]</p><p> dosed artificial and sandy kg−1soil. kg-1</p><p> loam natural soil 56 days 10;100 and 1000 mg Ag kg- LOEC = 773.3 mg (PVP- [19]</p><p> dosed artificial soil 1 dry soil Ag) and 727.6 mg (oleic</p><p> acid Ag) kg-1</p><p>TiO2 56 days 50; 100; 200; 400; 500; 750 LOEC= 50-200 mg TiO2 [17]</p><p>-1 -1 dosed natural test soil and 1000 mg TiO2 kg soil kg soil (stimulated</p><p> reproduction) - 56 days 200 and 10 000 mg TiO2 kg LOEC > 10 000 mg TiO2 [20]</p><p> dosed artificial and kg-1</p><p> natural soil CuO/Cu 56 days 5, 20, and 50 mg Cu kg-1 LOEC > 50 mg Cu kg-1 [21]</p><p> dosed artificial soil Au 56 days 5, 20, and 50 mg Cu kg-1 LOEC= 20-50 mg Au kg- [22]</p><p> dosed artificial soil 1 Abbreviations - Nanoparticles: CeO2 = cerium oxide; Ag = silver; TiO2 = titanium oxide; CuO/Cu = copper oxide/copper; Au = gold.; PVP = polyvinylpyrrolidone. EC50 = median effect concentration; LOEC = lowest observed effect concentration</p><p>Concentration of Ce in experimental suspensions</p><p>Weighed CeO2 NPs were vortexed and suspended in double-distilled water to achieve different nominal concentrations of 1000, 2000, and 5000 g mL-1. The samples were digested in a closed (Ethos 1 Milestone) microwave oven with HNO3 and H2O2.The ICP–MS analysis for Ce was carried at wavelength 418,659 nm and 446,021 nm, using a Hewlett-</p><p>Packard 4500 PLUS ICP–MS spectrometer equipped with a Cetac ASX-500 autosampler.</p><p>Table S2: ICP-MS measurements of Ce in experimental suspensions of CeO2 NPs in double- distilled water with concentrations of 1000, 2000, and 5000 g of Ce mL-1.</p><p>ICP-MS measurments of Ce CeO2 NPs in double- distilled water</p><p> c=1000 g/mL 588 mg/kg</p><p> c=2000 g/mL 1265 mg/kg</p><p> c=5000 g/mL 3211 mg/kg</p><p>Abbreviations: c=concentration of CeO2 nanoparticles in double-distilled water</p><p>Distribution of CeO2 NPs on abaxial leave surface </p><p>After exposure, ruminants of selected leaves were dried and attached to mounts with carbon tape, carbon sputtered (Sputter coater SCD 050, BAL-TEC), and investigated by scanning electron microscopy with energy-dispersive X-ray spectroscopy (FEI Helios NanoLab 650, equipped with Oxford Instruments EDXS system with X-max 50 mm 2 SDD detector and Inca software, Ljubljana, Slovenia). A</p><p>B</p><p>Figure S1. (A) CeO2 NPs dispersed over the abaxial leaf surface to give a final concentration of 5000 g g-1d.w. of the leaf. The spots on the SEM micrograph (Spectra 17, 18, and 19) indicate where the spectra for energy-dispersive X-ray spectroscopy analyses (EDXS) were performed. (B) Blue panels show the individual data for Spectra 17, 18, and 19, and confirm the presence of Ce.</p><p>Weight change of animals after exposure to CeO2 NPs</p><p>There was no weight change observed in control or any of exposure groups after 14 d of</p><p>-1 exposure, in which isopods were fed with CeO2 NPs (1000, 2000, and 5000 μg CeO2 NPs g d.w. of leaf). 32</p><p>30 )</p><p> g 28 m (</p><p> t h g</p><p> i 26 e w</p><p> l a 24 m i n A 22</p><p>20</p><p> d d d d d d d d l 0 14 0 14 0 14 0 14 ro l 0 0 00 0 nt tro 00 00 00 00 0 0 o n 1 0 2 0 5 50 c co 1 2</p><p>Figure S2: Weights of isopods in the beginning (0d, on the first day of exposure) and at the end (14d, after 14 d of exposure) of the experiments, in which animals were exposed to 1000,</p><p>-1 2000, and 5000 μg CeO2 NPs g d. w. of leaf. There were no statistically significant changes between animal weights at the beginning and at the end of experiments in all groups, as well as no differences between the control and exposed isopods. Symbols on the box plot represent minimum and maximum data values (whiskers), mean value (□), 75th percentile (upper edge of box), 25th percentile (lower edge of box), median (line in box), and max and min values</p><p>( -).</p>