asadkhone_source

antimicrobial-efficacy-of-nano-particles-for-crop-protection-and-sustainable-agriculture-–-springer

Antimicrobial efficacy of nano-particles for crop protection and sustainable agriculture – Springer

—

by

Developer
in

Abstract

Plant diseases cause colossal crop loss worldwide and are the major yield constraining component in agriculture. Nanotechnology, which has the possible to revolutionize numerous fields of science, innovation, drug, and agriculture. Nanotechnology can be utilized for combating the plant infectious diseases and nano-materials can be utilized as transporter of dynamic elements of pesticides, host defense etc. to the pathogens. The analysis of diseases, finding of pathogens may turn out to be substantially more precise and fast with the utilization of nanosensors. As worldwide demand for food production raises against an evolving atmosphere, nanotechnology could reasonably alleviate numerous challenges in disease managing by diminishing chemical inputs and advancing quick recognition of pathogens. The major goal of this review is to increase growth and productivity using supplements with nanoparticles. (i.e., metals, metal oxides, and carbon) to treat crop diseases and make agricultural practices more productive and sustainable. Prominently, this improved crop may not only be straight connected to the diminished occurrence of pathogenic microorganisms, yet in might possibly add nutritional benefits of the nanoparticles themselves, particularly for the micronutrients important for generating host resistance.

1 Introduction

Agriculture is the foundation of most nations and it gives food to people, legitimately and in a roundabout way. The global agricultural production is widely thought to need to expand or rise in order to take care of a rapidly developing total population, which is predicted to reach eight to nine billion by 2050. Production of agrifood is of indispensable significance, as it is one of the essential driving forces of economy. Due to the extreme pressure that environmental change, resource and energy shortages, and the rapidly expanding worldwide populace are placing on food and water resources, agricultural and horticultural practices are frequently in the news. Farming is getting progressively significant in the world of reducing resources and an ever-expanding worldwide populace [1, 2]. Given the expanding worldwide populace, it is important to utilize the advanced innovations.

Since materials’ physical, biological, and chemical properties differ at this scale, the term “nanoscale” references to measurements that are typically made between 1 and 100 nm. “1 billionth of a metre” is referred to as a nanometer (nm). An application of nano-technology is the understanding and manipulation of matter at the nanoscale due to a special phenomenon [3]. “A nanomaterial is any type of material that has at least one (or more) dimensions at the nanoscale”. Agriculture and related fields, such as hydroponics and fisheries, could be revolutionized by nanotechnology. Nano-agriculture involves utilizing nano-sized particles with remarkable properties to support crop growth, animals’ productivity and profitability [4, 5]. Application of nanotechnology to the horticulture, food divisions is recent contrasted to its utilization in drug delivery and drugs production [6] and it can possibly ensure protection of plants, screen plant development, distinguish plant diseases, enhance worldwide food production, and upgrade food quality [7,8,9,10,11,12,13]. Agriculture and food are the most significant fields of nanotechnology and its application [14,15,16,17,18,19].

Plant microbes cause critical decrease in crop productivity, with assessed worldwide colossal loss of 20–40% annually (Table 1) [20]. Currently management of pests depends intensely on the utilization of pesticides, for example, fungicides, insecticides and herbicides. Besides numerous benefits, like higher accessibility, and quick action, pesticides have several toxic effects towards non-target organisms, like generation of resistance and the resurgence of pest population [21]. Besides, it is assessed that approximately 90% of insecticides those are applied are lost during the procedure [21,22,23]. The utilization of nanoparticles to ensure plant protection can be through two distinct mechanisms: (a) nanoparticles themselves acting as crop protectant, or (b) nanoparticles as transporters or transporters for existing insecticides or dsRNA. It can be applied through spraying or imbibing the seeds, foliage and roots. Nanoparticles, as transporters or carriers, can give a few advantages, similar to (i) upgraded shelf life for usability, (ii) enhanced the solubility of pesticides that are poorly water soluble, and (iii) decreased toxicity [24]. This review emphasizes on the advanced methods of crop protection against pathogens using nano-particles and sustainable agriculture.

Table 1 List of some diseases caused by pathogenic microorganisms [30]

Full size table

2 Crop loss due to pathogens

Fungal infections cause significant agricultural losses. Although a wide range of fungicides is easily obtainable, improper application of these chemical fungicides may have negative effects on plant health (Table 1). A number of diseases, including anthracnose (Glomerella lindemuthiana), dry root rot (Macrophomina phaseolina), leaf blight (Xanthomonas campestris pv. vignicola), leaf crinkle disease (Urdbean leaf crinkle virus), leaf spot (Cercospora canescens), rust (Uromyces appendiculatus), and Mungbean yellow mosaic virus can all have a significant negative economic impact on the production of black gram [25]. Although the etiology and plant immunological mechanisms of maize white spot disease may be comparable to those of other maize leaf spot diseases that lower maize productivity, the disease is most likely a bacterial maize leaf spot caused by Pantoea ananatis [26]. At a projected expense of £0.12 million, the traditional biological control intervention of Papaya mealybug employing Acerophagus papayae benefited Ghanaian farmers and consumers to the tune of £1.1 million and £0.97 million over three years (2011–2013), respectively [27]. A natural, sustainable, and potentially effective therapy for gray mold is scopoletin, particularly when paired with triadimefon, which appears to block B. cinerea’s HOG biological pathway [28]. Crop disease and pests might be controlled by the several paths that nanomaterials most likely function through. It is still challenging to identify the boundary between toxicity and advantageous benefits, and the resulting toxicity differed across the several cultivars under examination [29]. Nanotechnology might be a game-changer in the future when it comes to tackling this issue.

3 Nanoparticles for crop protection and disease management

3.1 Nanoparticles (NPs) as protectants against pathogenic microorganisms

Plant pathogenic microorganisms are significant restricting factors in the generation of food and agriculture [31, 32]. Various techniques are utilized to control microorganisms yet none of them offer ideal control of the diseases caused by the pathogens [33]. Subsequently, an incredible scope for the exploitation of nanotechnology in the field of crop protection and management of pathogenic plant microorganisms exists. Nanoparticles alone can possibly be straightforwardly applied to seeds, roots or foliage for resistance against pathogens and several pests (Table 2). Metal nanoparticles have been intensively explored for their antimicrobial properties [34,35,36]. Silver nanoparticles because of “green synthesis” have been highly popular [37]. Silver nanoparticles have indicated antifungal activity against several pathogenic fungal groups like Alternaria alternata, Sclerotinia sclerotiorum, Macrophomina phaseolina, Rhizoctonia solani, Botrytis cinerea and Curvularia lunata [38]. At the point, upon spray of silver nanoparticles over leaves of bean plants, total inhibition of infection was reported [39]. Zinc nanoparticles have been shown to have antibacterial action against Pseudomonas aeruginosa, with the greatest inhibition zone (221.8 mm) being observed at a concentration of 25 ng mL−1 ZnO NPs [40]. According to the reports, ZnO NPs are a unique antibacterial material. ZnO nanoparticles have been found to have fungicidal effects on Penicillium expansum and Bortryis cinera, two postharvest harmful fungi (Table 2). Ag NPs/PVP, a combination of polyvinylpyrrolidone and silver nanoparticles, have been thought to have antibacterial activity against gram positive and gram negative bacteria’s [41]. CuO NPs have been shown to be effective at inhibiting the growth of bacteria such Staphylococcus aureus, Pseudomonas aeruginosa and Escherichia coli [41]. High antibacterial and bactericidal power was shown by silver nanoparticles against methicillin-resistant gramme positive bacterial species [42].

Table 2 Nanoparticles as carrier for fungicides

Full size table

Elbeshehy et al. [43] observed that bean plants exposed to a yellow mosaic infection and then scattered with Ag nanoparticles produced noticeably improved results (after 24 h of application of nanoparticles) than when they were applied prior to the appearance of the infection or simultaneously with inoculation of the pathogen. Ag nanoparticles demonstrated gigantic potential for management of plant disease however several difficulties related to them, for example, toxicity, soil interactions, and productivity [34, 44]. Poly-scattered gold nanoparticles through a mechanical grating supposedly melted and reduced the yellow mosaic of Barley providing protection against the virus [45]. The inherent features of chitosan nanoparticle are perfect, including lower toxicity to living things and “biodegradability, biocompatibility, non-allergenicity, and antimicrobial efficacy” [46]. It is reported to obstruct viral infection in plant tissues by securing them against diseases such as alfalfa mosaic virus, potato, peanut and cucumber viruses [47,48,49]. Chitosan nanoparticles have shown antibacterial capabilities, and they have been used to treat rice plants for Pyricularia grisea and Fusarium crown, as well as tomato root rot and Botrytis rot in grapes [30], but are less effective in combating microorganisms [50]. Chitosan may have antimicrobial effects in a variety of ways, including agglutination, H + / ATPase inhibition, cell membrane disruption, suppression of microbial growth and toxin generation, inhibition in mRNA and proteins, and obstruction of nutrient flow, according to Malerba and Cerana [51]. Chitosan showed antiviral impacts such as against Bean mosaic infection, Tobacco mosaic infection and Tobacco necrosis infection [51]. Copper sulphate (CuSo4) and Sodium tetraborate decahydrate (Na2B4O7) were discovered best in regulatory rust infections of peas. Micro-elements, for example, Mn and Zn likewise stifled the damping off and charcoal rot diseases in sunflower plants [52]. AG NPs/PVP were tried for fungicidal effects against Candida species.

3.2 Nanoparticles serve as carriers

Nano-particles are utilised as carriers to entrap, encapsulate, absorb, or attach particles in order to effectively build agricultural and horticultural formulations (Table 2). Silica nanoparticles are excellent delivery vehicles because they may be carefully regulated for size, shape, and structure [53]. For example, mesoporous silica nanoparticles (MSNs) and porous hollow silica nanoparticles (PHSNs) have spherical shapes with pore-like holes in them. The shell structure of porous hollow silica nanoparticles secures the molecules inside the nanoparticles against destruction by ultraviolet light. Several studies recommend that Si has been utilized to upgrade plant resilience against different abiotic and biotic stresses and hence, Si nano-particles appear to be the characteristic strategy for the improvement of agriculture [68]. Chitosan nanoparticles have less dissolving ability in aqueous solutions, because of their hydrophobic nature [50, 69]. To boost its solubility, chitosan is therefore typically combined with an organic or inorganic copolymer [50]. It enhances the characteristics of chitosan because it contains reactive amine and hydroxyl groups [69, 70]. The advantages of solid lipid nanoparticles (SLNs) are that they provide a matrix to ensure the trapping of lipophilic compounds without the need of solvents (organic) and can cause regulated release of many components [71, 72]. Solid lipid nanoparticles are made of lipids, which are solid at ambient temperature. “Layered double hydroxides (LDHs) are clays that forms hexagonal sheets with layers of active molecules entrapped in the interlayer space” [73]. LDH nanoparticles degrade under acidic environments, for example, moisture and carbon dioxide from the air can breakdown LDH [74, 75].

3.3 NPs to improve crop disease resistance

Because of their greater efficiency in controlling pests, reduced cost, and environmental friendliness, nanopesticides have emerged as a possible substitute for conventional pesticides [76]. Nanotechnology has great promise for controlling the concentration of secondary metabolites, generating genes that resist illness, distributing hormones and biomolecules, and producing transgenic plants that are more resistant to disease [77, 78]. According to Cao and Wang (2022) [79], NPs outperform ions, bulk particles, and commercial pesticides in the management of agricultural diseases by factors more than 1.5, 2.5, and 1.5, respectively. Mesoporous silica nanoparticles (NPs) therapies applied to the roots of watermelon reduced the disease severity by 40% and affected many genes linked to stress [80]. The antifungal and antibacterial properties of gold nanoparticles were demonstrated by Gautam et al. (2020) [81] against the fungus Erwinia sp., Bacillus megaterium, Pseudomonas syringe, Fusarium graminearum, Fusarium avenaceum, and Fusarium culmorum. When metsulfuron methyl-loaded polysaccharide nanoparticles (NPs) are applied topically to weeds growing in wheat, the weed biomass is significantly reduced in comparison to traditional herbicides [82]. Cu NPs were effective against five different bacterial species growth namely, Agrobacterium tumefaciens, Dickeya dadantii, Erwinia amylovora, Pectobacterium carotovorum, and Pseudomonas savastanoi [83].

4 Nanotechnology in sustainable agriculture

4.1 Role of nano-fertilizers on crop improvement

Nanofertilizer innovation is inventive and substituting strategies for its application is an approach to deliver nutrient supplements into the soil slowly and in a controlled manner, preventing Eutrofication and contamination of water resources [84, 85]. The development and productivity of horticultural crops have been seen to be enhanced by micronutrient nano-fertilizers, indicating encouraging outcomes. According to Ahmed et al. and Rivera-Gutierrez et al. [86, 87] these nano-fertilizers include trace elements including zinc, iron, boron, and copper, which are necessary for a number of physiological and metabolic activities in plants. Treatment with TiO2 nanoparticles had a considerable impact on maize development, whereas TiO2 treatment had little of an impact. Titanium nanoparticles improved photon energy transmission and light absorption. Another study discovered that the activity of the nitrate reductase enzyme in soybeans increased when a mixture of SiO and TiO nanoparticles was applied to the plant’s leaves [88]. Urea-hydroxyapatite nanohybrids increase agronomic nitrogen usage efficiency in agricultural field testing by around 30% as compared to pure urea [89]. Furthermore, many measurements have shown that the high specific surface area and density of NPs in nanohybrids cause their high reactivity [90]. Nano fertilizers have exceptional highlights like high absorption, increased productivity, improved photosynthesis, and expansion of leaves’ surface area [91]. When compared to control plants, pot cultures with foliar spraying showed that plants showered with 20 mg/mL zinc oxide nanoparticle showed enhanced growth and biomass output [92, 93]. In nano fertilizers, nutrient supplements can be encapsulated using nanomaterials and delivered as emulsions or nanoparticles [94]. The fertiliser or compost capsules’ coating and binding of nano- and subnano-composites aid in controlling the release of nutrients [95]. To demonstrate how grain crops may more efficiently absorb and use additional resources, researchers used a nanocomposite of nitrogen, phosphorus, potassium, micronutrients, mannose, and amino acids [96]. Chemicals that influence plant growth have been released under control using zinc-aluminum layered double hydroxide nanocomposites. When used as a super fertiliser, carbon nanotubes have been shown to penetrate tomato seeds and influence their germination and growth rates. Science demonstrated that the dense seed coat may be pierced by carbon nanotubes, supporting water absorption into seeds [97, 98].

4.2 Nanotechnology to enhance crop yields

Productivity has been demonstrated to increase when nanoparticle fertiliser is administered topically [99]. Many nanomaterials, mainly made of metal and carbon, have been examined in connection to their translocation, absorption, accumulation, and in particular their impacts on growth and development in a variety of agricultural plants [100, 101]. Examples of the advantageous morphological impacts include the increased germination rate, root and shoot length, and vegetative biomass of seedlings in many agricultural plants, including maize, wheat, ryegrass, soybean, tomato, radish, lettuce, spinach, onion, pumpkin, and cucumber. Improvements in a variety of physiological processes, such as enhanced photosynthetic activity and nitrogen uptake by metal-based nanomaterials in a select few crops, including soybean [102], spinach [103], and peanut [104], were noted. Nanobiotechnology imparts several technologies to improve agricultural quality and productivity through improvements in genetic level of plants and gene delivery and transport of drug molecules to site-specific cellular levels [105]. Nano-titanium dioxide, generational transmission of fullerol through rice seeds, and changes in gene expression at the cellular level caused by multiwalled carbon nanotubes in tomato and tobacco plants [106, 107] have all been used to support the hereditary implications of positive changes caused by nanoparticles. Because of the recovery reactions of the plant metabolic processes, it has been observed that germinating maize seeds subjected to magnetic fluids followed by exposure to electromagnetic field induce an articulated increase in nucleic acid [108, 109]. Tetramethylammonium hydroxide-coated magnetic nanoparticles caused maize’s chlorophyll-a content to rise. Additionally, iron oxide use in pumpkin was found to encourage root elongation by Wang et al. [110]. Positive effects on strawberry development and production have been shown when zinc oxide (ZnO) and iron oxide (FeO) nanoparticles are added at a concentration of 150 parts per million (ppm) each [111]. Mesoporous silica nanoparticle therapies applied to the roots of watermelon reduced the disease severity by 40% and affected many genes linked to stress [80]. It has been demonstrated that FeO-NPs not only promote plant development but also lower the Na + and Cl- concentration in wheat grains [112]. Mahmood and Hussain reported After wasted tea was gasified catalytically, 60% liquid extract, 28% fuel gases, and 12% charcoal were produced. 53.03% ethene, 37.18% methanol, and 4.59% methane are found in gaseous products [113]. A nanotechnology-based approach might complement an environmentally friendly agricultural production method [114].

5 Conclusion and future perspectives

The possible usages and advantages of nano-technology are tremendous. It is alluring to encourage agricultural practices, boost output while lowering inputs through better monitoring and focused action, and increase yield efficiency with nanotechnology. Because of nanotechnology, plants can utilise water, pesticides, and fertilizers more effectively. The use of nanotechnology may benefit both the agri-food industry through the development of cutting-edge goods and farmers through increased food output. The application of nanoparticles in crop protection and production has the potential to revolutionize the way we grow and harvest crops, offering sustainable solutions to meet the rising demand for high-quality and nutritious food. However, to achieve these goals and take advantage of new opportunities, future research should concentrate on optimizing nanoparticle formulations, improving their delivery methods, and evaluating their long-term effects on plant growth, fruit quality, and the environment. To pinpoint the limitations, minimize the detrimental effects, and optimize the advantages, more study is required. The capacity of nanotechnology to function within the confines of a sustainable agricultural system will ultimately determine its fate. NPs can exhibit antibacterial capabilities either by themselves or in conjunction with antibiotics, which helps to mitigate the current problem of acquired resistance brought on by overuse or abuse of antibiotics. Future research should concentrate on two areas in light of this possible application: evaluating the safety aspects of NP use and reducing the environmental effect of NP synthesis.

Data availability

Not applicable.

References

  1. Brennan B. Nanobiotechnology in Agriculture. Menlo Park, CA: Strategic Business Insights. 2012.

  2. Jyotirmayee B, Mahalik G. A review on selected pharmacological activities of Curcuma longa L. Int J Food Properties. 2022;25:1377–98. https://doi.org/10.1080/10942912.2022.2082464.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Kaiser DL, Standridge S, Friedersdorf L, Geraci CL, Kronz F, Meador MA, Pate BD, Rudnitsky RG, Sloter LE, Stepp DM. National Nanotechnology Initiative Strategic Plan. 2014. http://eprints.internano.org/id/eprint/1921.

  4. Hu L, Feng Z, Yu Y, Yao H. Effects of metal oxide nanoparticles on nitrous oxide emissions in agriculture soil. Agriculture. 2022;12:770.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Scott N, Chen H. Nanoscale science and engineering for agriculture and food systems; National Planning Workshop; November 18–19, Washington, DC. 2002.

  6. Garcia M, Forbe T, Gonzalez E. Potential applications of nanotechnology in the agro-food sector. Food Sci Technol. 2010;30:573–81. https://doi.org/10.1590/S0101-20612010000300002.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Gruère G, Narrod C, Abbott L. Agriculture, food, and water nanotechnologies for the poor:35 opportunities and constraints policy brief 19. Washington: International Food Policy Research Institute; 2011.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Frewer LJ, Norde W, Fischer ARH, Kampers FWH, editors. Nanotechnology in the agri-food sector: implications for the future. Weinheim: Wiley-VCH; 2011.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Pérez-de-Luque A, Hermosín MC. Nanotechnology and its use in agriculture. In: Bagchi D, Bagchi M, Moriyama H, Shahidi F, editors. Bio-nanotechnology: A Revolution in Food, Bomedical and Health Sciences. Hoboken: Wiley-Blackwell; 2013. p. 299–405. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118451915.ch20.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  10. Prasad R, Kumar V, Prasad KS. Nanotechnology in sustainable agriculture: present concerns and future aspects. Afr J Biotechnol. 2014;13:705–13. https://doi.org/10.5897/AJBX2013.13554.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Biswal SK, Nayak AK, Parida UK, Nayak PL. Applications of nanotechnology in agriculture and food sciences. Int J Sci Innovate Discov. 2012;2:21–36.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Ditta A. How helpful is nanotechnology in agriculture? Adv Nat Sci Nanosci Nanotechnol. 2012;3: 033002. https://doi.org/10.1088/2043-6262/3/3/033002.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Khalil HS, Maulu S, Verdegem M, Abdel-Tawwab M. Embracing nanotechnology for selenium application in aquafeeds. Rev Aquac. 2023;15:112–29. https://doi.org/10.1111/raq.12705.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Coles D, Frewer LJ. Nanotechnology applied to European food production: a review of ethical and regulatory issues. Trends Food Sci Technol. 2013;34:32–43. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tifs.2013.08.006.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Hong J, Peralta-Videa JR, Gardea-Torresdey JL. Nanomaterials in agricultural production: benefits and possible threats? Sustainable nanotechnology and the environment: advances and achievements. Washington: American Chemical Society; 2013. p. 73–90. https://doi.org/10.1021/bk-2013-1124.ch005.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  16. Raliya R, Tarafdar JC, Gulecha K, Choudhary K, Rameshwar R, Prakash M, Saran RP. Scope of nanoscience and nanotechnology in agriculture. J Appl Biol Biotechnol. 2013;1:041–4. https://doi.org/10.7324/JABB.2013.1307.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Kuzma J, Ver-Hage P. Nanotechnology in agriculture and food production: anticipated applications. Washington: The Project on Emerging Nanotechnologies; 2006.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Cortes-Lobos R. Can Agri-Food Nanotechnology Contribute to Achieve the Millennium Development Goals in Developing Countries? Los Polvorines, Argentina: Universidad Nacional de General Sarmiento. 2011. Available from: http://www.ungs.edu.ar/globelics/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/ID-15-Cortes-Learning-and-innovation-lessons-fromsectorial-studies.pdf. Accessed 18 April 2014

  19. Chen H, Seiber JN, Hotze M. ACS select on nanotechnology in food and agriculture: a perspective on implications and applications. J Agri Food Chem. 2014;62:1209–12. https://doi.org/10.1021/jf5002588.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Flood J. The importance of plant health to food security. Food Secur. 2010;2:215–31. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12571-010-0072-5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Stephenson GR. Pesticide use and world food production: risks and benefits. Washington: ACS Publications; 2003.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Ghormade V, Deshpande MV, Paknikar KM. Perspectives for nano-biotechnology enabled protection and nutrition of plants. Biotechnol Adv. 2011;29:792–803. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biotechadv.2011.06.007.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Khandelwal N, Barbole RS, Banerjee SS, Chate GP, Biradar AV, Khandare JJ, Giri AP. Budding trends in integrated pest management using advanced micro-and nano-materials: challenges and perspectives. J Environ Manag. 2016;184:157–69. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2016.09.071.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Hayles J, Johnson L, Worthley C, Losic D. Nanopesticides: a review of current research and perspectives. New Pestic Soil Sens. 2017. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-804299-1.00006-0.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Verma R, Kushwaha KPS, Kumar S, Bisht AS, Rawat S, Pandey R. Black gram [Vigna mungo (L.) Hepper]: a new host plant of Fusarium humuli, F. chlamydosporum and F. nanum causing pod rot in India. Crop Prot. 2024;175:106482.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Xing E, Fan X, Jiang F, Zhang Y. Advancements in research on prevention and control strategies for maize white spot disease. Genes. 2023;14(11):2061.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  27. Thiombiano L, Solal-Céligny A. Economic impact assessment of the classical biological control of Papaya Mealybug in Ghana. J Agric For. 2015;2:1–18.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Yuan X, Yang F, Wang Y, Li S, Zhang D, Liang W, Yang Q. Scopoletin negatively regulates the HOG pathway and exerts antifungal activity against Botrytis cinerea by interfering with infection structures, cell wall, and cell membrane formation. Phytopathol Res. 2024;6(1):1.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. dos Santos OAL, dos Santos MS, Antunes Filho S, Backx BP. Nanotechnology for the control of plant pathogens and pests. Plant Nano Biol. 2024. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.plana.2024.100080.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Singh HB. Management of plant pathogens with microorganisms. Proc Indian Natl Sci Acad. 2014;80:443–54. https://doi.org/10.16943/ptinsa/2014/v80i2/55120.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Khan MM, Khan MR, Mohiddin FA. The relative performance of different inoculation methods with Alternaria brassicae and A. brassicicola on Indian mustard. Plant Pathol J. 2012;11:93–8. https://doi.org/10.3923/ppj.2012.93.98.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Khan MR. Nematodes, an emerging threat to global forests: Assessment and management. Plant Pathol J. 2012;11:99–113. https://doi.org/10.3923/ppj.2012.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Khan MR, Jairajpuri MS. Nematode infestation in food crops-national scenario. Nematode Infestations, Part I: Food Crop: 1–16. 2010.

  34. Kah M, Hofmann T. Nanopesticide research: current trends and future priorities. Environ Int. 2014;63:224–35. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envint.2013.11.015.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Gogos A, Knauer K, Bucheli TD. Nanomaterials in plant protection and fertilization: current state, foreseen applications, and research priorities. J Agric Food Chem. 2012;60:9781–92. https://doi.org/10.1021/jf302154y.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Kim DY, Kadam A, Shinde S, Saratale RG, Patra J, Ghodake G. Recent developments in nanotechnology transforming the agricultural sector: a transition replete with opportunities. J Sci Food Agric. 2018;98:849–64. https://doi.org/10.1002/jsfa.8749.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Rafique M, Sadaf I, Rafique MS, Tahir MB. A review on green synthesis of silver nanoparticles and their applications. Artif Cells Nanomed Biotechnol. 2017;45:1272–91. https://doi.org/10.1080/21691401.2016.1241792.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Krishnaraj C, Ramachandran R, Mohan K, Kalaichelvan P. Optimization for rapid synthesis of silver nanoparticles and its effect on phytopathogenic fungi. Spectrochim Acta Part A Mol Biomol Spectrosc. 2012;93:95–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.saa.2012.03.002.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  39. Jain D, Kothari S. Green synthesis of silver nanoparticles and their application in plant virus inhibition. J Mycol Plant Pathol. 2014;44:21–4.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  40. Jayaseelan C, Rahuman AA, Kirthi AV, Marimuthu S, Santhoshkumar T, Bagavan A, Gaurav K, Kartik L, Rao KB. Novel microbial route to synthesize ZnO nanoparticles using Aeromonas hydrophila and their activity against pathogenic bacteria and fungi. Spectrochim Acta Part A Mol Biomol Spectroscopy. 2012;90:78–84. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.saa.2012.01.006.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  41. Azam A, Ahmed AS, Oves M, Khan MS, Memic A. Size-dependent antimicrobial properties of CuO nanoparticles against Gram-positive and-negative bacterial strains. Int J Nanomed. 2012;7:3527. https://doi.org/10.2147/IJN.S29020.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  42. Guzmán MG, Dille J, Godet S. Synthesis of silver nanoparticles by chemical reduction method and their antibacterial activity. Int J Chem Biomol Eng. 2009;2:104–11.

    Google Scholar 

  43. Elbeshehy EKF, Elazzazy AM, Aggelis G. Silver nanoparticles synthesis mediated by new isolates of Bacillus spp. nanoparticle characterization and their activity against Bean Yellow Mosaic Virus and human pathogens. Front Microbiol. 2015;6:453. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2015.00453.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  44. Mishra S, Singh H. Biosynthesized silver nanoparticles as a nanoweapon against phytopathogens: exploring their scope and potential in agriculture. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol. 2015;99:1097–107. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00253-014-6296-0.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Alkubaisi NAO, Aref NMMA, Hendi AA. Method of Inhibiting Plant Virus Using Gold Nanoparticles. US Patents US9198434B1. 2015.

  46. Cota-Arriola O, Onofre Cortez-Rocha M, Burgos-Hernández A, Marina Ezquerra-Brauer J, Plascencia-Jatomea M. Controlled release matrices and micro/nanoparticles of chitosan with antimicrobial potential: Development of new strategies for microbial control in agriculture. J Sci Food Agric. 2013;93:1525–36. https://doi.org/10.1002/jsfa.6060.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Kochkina Z, Pospeshny G, Chirkov S. Inhibition by chitosan of productive infection of T-series bacteriophages in the Escherichia coli culture. Mikrobiologiia. 1994;64:211–5.

    Google Scholar 

  48. Pospieszny H, Chirkov S, Atabekov J. Induction of antiviral resistance in plants by chitosan. Plant Sci. 1991;79:63–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/0168-9452(91)90070-O.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  49. Chirkov SN. The antiviral activity of chitosan (review). Appl Biochem Microbiol. 2002;38:1–8.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  50. Kashyap PL, Xiang X, Heiden P. Chitosan nanoparticle-based delivery systems for sustainable agriculture. Int J Boil Macromol. 2015;77:36–51. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2015.02.039.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  51. Malerba M, Cerana R. Chitosan effects on plant systems. Int J molecular Sci. 2016;17(7):996.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  52. Abd El-Hai KM, El-Metwally MA, El-Baz SM, Zeid AM. The use of antioxidants and microelements for controlling damping-off caused by Rhizoctonia solani and charcoal rot caused by Macrophomina phasoliana on sunflower. Plant Pathol J. 2009;8:79–89. https://doi.org/10.3923/ppj.2009.79.89.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  53. Kumar S, Kumar D, Dilbaghi N. Preparation, characterization, and bio-efficacy evaluation of controlled release carbendazim-loaded polymeric nanoparticles. Environ Sci Pollut Res. 2017;24:926–37. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-016-7774-y.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  54. Cao L, Zhang H, Cao C, Zhang J, Li F, Huang Q. Quaternized chitosan-capped mesoporous silica nanoparticles as nanocarriers for controlled pesticide release. Nanomaterials. 2016;6:126. https://doi.org/10.3390/nano6070126.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  55. Hasheminejad N, Khodaiyan F, Safari M. Improving the antifungal activity of clove essential oil encapsulated by chitosan nanoparticles. Food Chem. 2019;275:113–22. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodchem.2018.09.085.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  56. Kalagatur NK, Ghosh OSN, Sundararaj N, Mudili V. Antifungal activity of chitosan nanoparticles encapsulated with Cymbopogon martinii essential oil on plant pathogenic fungi Fusarium graminearum. Front Pharmacol. 2018;9:610. https://doi.org/10.3389/fphar.2018.00610.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  57. Huang W, Wang C, Duan H, Bi Y, Wu D, Du J, Yu H. Synergistic antifungal effect of biosynthesized silver nanoparticles combined with fungicides. Int J Agric Biol. 2018;20:1225–9. https://doi.org/10.17957/IJAB/15.0595.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  58. Mody VV, Cox A, Shah S, Singh A, Bevins W, Parihar H. Magnetic nanoparticle drug delivery systems for targeting tumor. Appl Nanosci. 2014;4:385–92. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13204-013-0216-y.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  59. Hou R, Zhang Z, Pang S, Yang T, Clark JM, He L. Alteration of the nonsystemic behavior of the pesticide ferbam on tea leaves by engineered gold nanoparticles. Environ Sci Technol. 2016;50:6216–23. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.6b01336.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  60. Zhao P, Cao L, Ma D, Zhou Z, Huang Q, Pan C. Translocation, distribution and degradation of prochloraz-loaded mesoporous silica nanoparticles in cucumber plants. Nanoscale. 2018;10:1798–806.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  61. Campos EVR, De Oliveira JL, Da Silva CMG, Pascoli M, Pasquoto T, Lima R, Abhilash P, Fraceto LF. Polymeric and solid lipid nanoparticles for sustained release of carbendazim and tebuconazole in agricultural applications. Sci Rep. 2015;5:1–4. https://doi.org/10.1038/srep13809.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  62. Wang Y, Li C, Wang Y, Zhang Y, Li X. Compound pesticide controlled release system based on the mixture of poly (butylene succinate) and PLA. J Microencapsul. 2018;35:1494–503. https://doi.org/10.1080/02652048.2018.1538265.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  63. Liu Y, Laks P, Heiden P. Controlled release of biocides in solid wood. I. Efficacy against brown rot wood decay fungus (Gloeophyllum trabeum). J Appl Polym Sci. 2002;86:596–607. https://doi.org/10.1002/app.10896.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  64. Liu Y, Yan L, Heiden P, Laks P. Use of nanoparticles for controlled release of biocides in solid wood. J Appl Polym Sci. 2001;79:458–65. https://doi.org/10.1002/1097-4628(20010118)79:3%3c458::AID-APP80%3e3.0.CO;2-H.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  65. Liu Y, Laks P, Heiden P. Controlled release of biocides in solid wood. III. Preparation and characterization of surfactant-free nanoparticles. J Appl Polym Sci. 2002;86:615–21. https://doi.org/10.1002/app.10898.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  66. Liu Y, Laks P, Heiden P. Controlled release of biocides in solid wood. II. Efficacy against Trametes versicolor and Gloeophyllum trabeum wood decay fungi. J Appl Polym Sci. 2002;86:608–14. https://doi.org/10.1002/app.10897.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  67. Hatfaludi T, Liska M, Zellinger D, Ousman JP, Szostak M, Jalava K, Lubitz W. Bacterial ghost technology for pesticide delivery. J Agric Food Chem. 2004;52:5627–34. https://doi.org/10.1021/jf049489w.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  68. Li M, Huang Q, Wu Y. A novel chitosan-poly (lactide) copolymer and its submicron particles as imidacloprid carriers. Pest Manag Sci. 2011;67:831–6. https://doi.org/10.1002/ps.2120.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  69. Malerba M, Cerana R. Chitosan effects on plant systems. Int J Mol Sci. 2016;17:996. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms17070996.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  70. Ekambaram P, Sathali AAH, Priyanka K. Solid lipid nanoparticles: a review. Sci Rev Chem Commun. 2012;2:80–102.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  71. Borel T, Sabliov C. Nanodelivery of bioactive components for food applications: types of delivery systems, properties, and their effect on ADME profiles and toxicity of nanoparticles. Annu Rev Food Sci Technol. 2014;5:197–213. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-food-030713-092354.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  72. Xu ZP, Stevenson GS, Lu CQ, Lu GQ, Bartlett PF, Gray PP. Stable suspension of layered double hydroxide nanoparticles in aqueous solution. J Am Chem Soc. 2006;128:36–7. https://doi.org/10.1021/ja056652a.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  73. Barik T, Sahu B, Swain V. Nanosilica-from medicine to pest control. Parasitol Res. 2008;103:253–8. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00436-008-0975-7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  74. Mitter N, Worrall EA, Robinson KE, Li P, Jain RG, Taochy C, Fletcher SJ, Carroll BJ, Lu G, Xu ZP. Clay nanosheets for topical delivery of RNAi for sustained protection against plant viruses. Nat Plants. 2017;3:1–10.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  75. Bao W, Wang J, Wang Q, O’Hare D, Wan Y. Layered double hydroxide nanotransporter for molecule delivery to intact plant cells. Sci Rep. 2016;6:1–9.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  76. Bhan S, Mohan L, Srivastava CN. Nanopesticides: a recent novel ecofriendly approach in insect pest management. J Entomol Res. 2018;42:263–70.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  77. Dong BR, Jiang R, Chen JF, Xiao Y, Lv ZY, Chen WS. Strategic nanoparticle-mediated plant disease resistance. Crit Rev Biotechnol. 2023;43:22–37. https://doi.org/10.1080/07388551.2021.2007842.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  78. Shaikh A, Jamla M, Joshi S, Patil S, Oak U, Kumar V. Microbial nanotechnology for producing stress smart crops. Plant Nano Biol. 2024;23: 100063. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.plana.2024.100063.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  79. Cao X, Wang Z. Application of nano-agricultural technology for biotic stress management: mechanisms, optimization, and future perspectives. Environ Sci: Nano. 2022;9:4336–53. https://doi.org/10.1039/D2EN00651K.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  80. Buchman JT, Elmer WH, Ma C, Landy KM, White JC, Haynes CL. Chitosan-Coated mesoporous silica nanoparticle treatment of Citrullus lanatus (watermelon): Enhanced fungal disease suppression and modulated expression of stress-related genes. ACS Sustain Chem Eng. 2019;7:19649–59.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  81. Gautam N, Salaria N, Thakur K, Kukreja S, Yadav N, Yadav R, Goutam U. Green silver nanoparticles for phytopathogen control. Proc Natl Acad Sci India Sect B Biol Sci. 2020;90:439–46.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  82. Kumar S, Bhanjana G, Sharma A, Dilbaghi N, Sidhu MC, Kim KH. Development of nanoformulation approaches for the control of weeds. Sci Total Environ. 2017;586:1272–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.SCITOTENV.2017.02.138.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  83. Varympopi A, Dimopoulou A, Theologidis I, Karamanidou T, Kerou AK, Vlachou A, Karfaridis D, Papafotis D, Hatzinikolaou DG, Tsouknidas A, Skandalis N. Bactericides based on copper nanoparticles restrain growth of important plant pathogens. Pathog. 2020;9:1024. https://doi.org/10.3390/PATHOGENS9121024.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  84. Naderi MR, Abedi A. Application of nanotechnology in agriculture and refinement of environmental pollutants. J Nanotechnol. 2012;11:18–26.

    Google Scholar 

  85. Moaveni P, Kheiri T. TiO2 nano particles affected on maize (Zea mays L). In: 2nd International Conference on Agricultural and Animal Science, Maldives. Singapore: IACSIT Press. pp. 160–163. 2011.

  86. Ahmed R, Uddin MK, Quddus MA, Samad MYA, Hossain MM, Haque ANA. Impact of foliar application of Zinc and Zinc oxide nanoparticles on growth, yield, nutrient uptake and quality of Tomato. Horticulturae. 2023;9:162.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  87. Rivera-Gutierrez RG, Preciado-Rangel P, Fortis-Hernandez M, Betancourt Galindo R, Yescas-Coronado P, Orozco-Vidal JA. Zinc oxide nanoparticles and their effect on melon yield and quality. Revista mexicana de ciencias agrícolas. 2021;12:791–803.

    Google Scholar 

  88. Lu CM, Zhang CY, Wen JQ, Wu GR, Tao MX. Research of the effect of nanometer materials on germination and growth enhancement of glycine max and its mechanism. Soybean Sci. 2002;21:168–71.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  89. Kottegoda N, Sandaruwan C, Priyadarshana G, Siriwardhana A, Rathnayake UA, Berugoda Arachchige DM, Kumarasinghe AR, Dahanayake D, Karunaratne V, Amaratunga GAJ. Urea-hydroxyapatite nanohybrids for slow release of nitrogen. ACS Nano. 2017;11:1214–21. https://doi.org/10.1021/ACSNANO.6B07781/SUPPL_FILE/NN6B07781_LIVESLIDES.MP4.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  90. Ha NMC, Nguyen TH, Wang SL, Nguyen AD. Preparation of NPK nanofertilizer based on chitosan nanoparticles and its effect on biophysical characteristics and growth of coffee in green house. Res Chem Intermed. 2019;45:51–63. https://doi.org/10.1007/S11164-018-3630-7/METRICS.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  91. Iran Nanotechnology Initiative Council. First nano-organic iron chelated fertilizer invented in Iran [webpage on the Internet] Tehran, Iran: Iran Nanotechnology Initiative Council. 2009.

  92. Panwar J, Jain N, Bhargaya A, Akhtar MS, Yun YS. Positive effect of zinc oxide nanoparticels on tomato plants: A step towards developing “Nano-fertilizers”. In: International Conference on Environmental Research and Technology (ICERT), Penang, Malaysia. 2012.

  93. Da la Rosa G, Lopez-Moreno ML, De Haro D, Botez CE, Peralta-Videa JR, Gardea-Torresdey J. Effects of ZnO nanoparticles in alfalfa, tomato, and cucumber at the germination stage: root development and X-ray absorption spectroscopy studies. Pure Appl Chem. 2013;85:2161–74. https://doi.org/10.1351/pac-con-12-09-05.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  94. DeRosa MC, Monreal C, Schnitzer M, Walsh R, Sultan Y. Nanotechnology in fertilizers. Nat Nanotechnol. 2010;5:91.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  95. Liu X, Feng Z, Zhang S, Zhang J, Xiao Q, Wang Y. Preparation and testing of cementing nano-subnanocomposites of slow or controlled release of fertilizers. Sci Agr Sin. 2006;39:1598–604.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  96. Guo J. Synchrotron radiation, soft X-ray spectroscopy and nanomaterials. Int J Nanotecccessedhnol. 2004;1:193–225. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJNT.2004.003729.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  97. Khodakovskaya M, Dervishi E, Mahmood M, Xu Y, Li Z, Watanabe F, Biris AS. Carbon nanotubes are able to penetrate plant seed coat and dramatically affect seed germination and plant growth. ACS Nano. 2009;3:3221–7. https://doi.org/10.1021/nn900887m.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  98. Rai V, Acharya S, Dey N. Implications of nanobiosensors in agriculture. J Biomater Nanobiotchnol. 2012;3:315–24.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  99. Raliya R, Tarafdar JC. ZnO nanoparticle biosynthesis and its effect on phosphorous-mobilizing enzyme secretion and gum contents in Clusterbean (Cyamopsis tetragonoloba L). Agricul Res. 2013;2:48–57. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40003-012-0049-z.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  100. Nair R, Varghese SH, Nair BG, Maekawa T, Yoshida Y, Kumar DS. Nanoparticulate material delivery to plants. Plant Sci. 2010;179:154–63. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.plantsci.2010.04.012.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  101. Rico CM, Majumdar S, Duarte-Gardea M, Peralta-Videa JR, Gardea-Torresdey JL. Interaction of nanoparticles with edible plants and their possible implications in the food chain. J Agric Food Chem. 2011;59:3485–98. https://doi.org/10.1021/jf104517j.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  102. Agrawal S, Rathore P. Nanotechnology pros and cons to agriculture: a review. Int J Curr Microbiol App Sci. 2014;3:43–55.

    Google Scholar 

  103. Zheng L, Hong F, Lu S, Liu C. Effect of nano-TiO2 on strength of naturally aged seeds and growth of spinach. Biol Trace Elem Res. 2005;104:83–92. https://doi.org/10.1385/BTER:104:1:083.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  104. Giraldo JP, Landry MP, Faltermeier SM, McNicholas TP, Lverson NM, Boghossian AA, Reuel NF, Hilmer AJ, Sen F, Brew JA, Strano MS. Plant nanobionics approach to augment photosynthesis and biochemical sensing. Nat Mater. 2014;13:400–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  105. Ahmed F, Arshi N, Kumar S, Gill R, Tuteja N, Koo BH. Nanobiotechnology: scope and potential for crop improvement. In: Tuteja N, Singh S, editors. Gill crop improvement under adverse conditions. New York: Springer; 2013. p. 245–69. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-4633-0_11.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  106. Khodakovskaya M, de Silva K, Nedosekin DA, Dervishi E, Biris AS, Shashkov EV, Galanzha EI, Zharov VP. Complex genetic, photothermal, and photoacoustic analysis of nanoparticle-plant interactions. Proc Natl Acad Sci. 2011;108:1028–33. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1008856108.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  107. Khodakovskaya MV, de Silva K, Biris AS, Dervishi E, Villagarcia H. Carbon nanotubes induce growth enhancement of tobacco cells. ACS Nano. 2012;6:2128–35.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  108. Răcuciu M, Miclăuş S, Creangă DE. The response of plant tissues to magnetic fluid and electromagnetic exposure. Romanian J Biophys. 2009;19:73–82.

    Google Scholar 

  109. Raza MAS, Zulfiqar B, Iqbal R, Muzamil MN, Aslam MU, Muhammad F, Habib-ur-Rahman M. Morpho-physiological and biochemical response of wheat to various treatments of silicon nano-particles under drought stress conditions. Sci Rep. 2023;13(1):2700.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  110. Wang H, Kou X, Pei Z, Xiao JQ, Shan X, Xing B. Physiological effects of magnetite (Fe3O4) nanoparticles on perennial ryegrass (Lolium perenne L.) and pumpkin (Cucurbita mixta) plants. Nanotoxicology. 2011;5:30–42. https://doi.org/10.3109/17435390.2010.489206.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  111. Kumar UJ. Effect of different concentrations of iron oxide and zinc oxide nano-particles on quality of strawberry (Fragaria x ananassa Dutch) cv. chandler. Pharma Innov J. 2022;11(2022):1259–63.

    Google Scholar 

  112. Manzoor N, Ahmed T, Noman M, Shahid M, Nazir MM, Ali L, Wang G. Iron oxide nanoparticles ameliorated the cadmium and salinity stresses in wheat plants, facilitating photosynthetic pigments and restricting cadmium uptake. Sci Total Environ. 2021;769: 145221. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.145221.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  113. Mahmood T, Hussain ST. Nanobiotechnology for the production of biofuels from spent tea. African J Biotech. 2010;9:858–68. https://doi.org/10.5897/AJB09.1555.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  114. Duhan JS, Kumar R, Kumar N, Kaur P, Nehra K, Duhan S. Nanotechnology: the new perspective in precision agriculture. Biotechnol Rep. 2017;15:11–23. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.btre.2017.03.002.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors are tankful to Head, Department of Botany, Centurion University and Head, Department of Botany, Utkal University for necessary support.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Botany, Utkal University, Vani Vihar, Bhubaneswar, Odisha, India

    Pallavi Jali

  2. Department of Environmental Science, Government Autonomous College, Phulbani, Odisha, India

    Srinivas Acharya

  3. Department of Botany, School of Applied Sciences, Centurion University of Technology and Management, Jatani, Odisha, India

    Gyanranjan Mahalik

Contributions

GM, SA & PJ: Conceptualization and design this work; PJ, SA & GA: Writing, collection, interpretation and arrangement of data. All authors review and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Srinivas Acharya or Gyanranjan Mahalik.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

All authors declare no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Jali, P., Acharya, S. & Mahalik, G. Antimicrobial efficacy of nano-particles for crop protection and sustainable agriculture. Discover Nano 19, 117 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1186/s11671-024-04059-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s11671-024-04059-9

Keywords