As early as sixty years ago, zinc sulphide was first thought of as a pigment for coloring India rubber and a patent for the process of its manufacture was issued in England. But it was not until twenty years later that zinc sulphide and its manufacture was seriously considered as a pigment for paint, and in 1874 a patent was issued for a process of manufacturing a white pigment, composed of zinc sulphide and barium sulphate, known as Charlton white, also as Orr's white enamel. This was followed in 1876 by a patent issued to a manufacturer named Griffith and the product, which was similar in character to Charlton white, was known as Griffith's patent zinc white. In 1879 another patent for a more novel process was obtained by Griffith & Cawley, the product made under this process proving the best of the series placed upon the market up to that date. After that time many new processes were patented, all, however, tending to the same object, that of producing a white pigment, composed of zinc sulphide and barium carbonate, the results, however, in many cases ending with failure.

No acute effects of nano-sized TiO₂ were observed in Danio rerio (zebrafish) embryos. Exposure of rainbow trout to TiO₂ NPs triggered lipid peroxidation, influence on the respiratory tract, disturbance in the metabolism of Cu and Zn, induction of intestinal erosion  and accumulation in kidney tissue. Linhua et al. exposed juvenile carp to 100 and 200 mg/ml of particles and TiO₂ observed no mortality. However, the fish suffered from oxidative stress and pathological changes in gill and liver. In the infaunal species Arenicola marina, exposure to TiO₂ NPs in sediment caused sub-lethal effects including decrease in casting rate and increase in cellular and DNA damage. Aggregated particles were visible in the lumen of the gut, but no uptake through the gut or the skin was observed.