A review of the use of engineered nanomaterials to suppress plant disease and enhance crop yield

  • Alia Servin
  • Wade Elmer
  • Arnab Mukherjee
  • Roberto De la Torre-Roche
  • Helmi Hamdi
  • Jason C. White
  • Prem Bindraban
  • Christian Dimkpa
Review

Abstract

Nanotechnology has the potential to play a critical role in global food production, food security, and food safety. The applications of nanotechnology in agriculture include fertilizers to increase plant growth and yield, pesticides for pest and disease management, and sensors for monitoring soil quality and plant health. Over the past decade, a number of patents and products incorporating nanomaterials into agricultural practices (e.g., nanopesticides, nanofertilizers, and nanosensors) have been developed. The collective goal of all of these approaches is to enhance the efficiency and sustainability of agricultural practices by requiring less input and generating less waste than conventional products and approaches. This review evaluates the current literature on the use of nanoscale nutrients (metals, metal oxides, carbon) to suppress crop disease and subsequently enhance growth and yield. Notably, this enhanced yield may not only be directly linked to the reduced presence of pathogenic organisms, but also to the potential nutritional value of the nanoparticles themselves, especially for the essential micronutrients necessary for host defense. We also posit that these positive effects are likely a result of the greater availability of the nutrients in the “nano” form. Last, we offer comments on the current regulatory perspective for such applications.

Keywords

Nanotechnology Agriculture Pathogen 

Notes

Acknowledgments

The authors acknowledge the Virtual Fertilizer Research Center for funding and support, as well as USDA-AFRI (#2011-67006-30181).

References

  1. Ahmad P, Rasool S (2014) Emerging technologies and management of crop stress tolerance: volume 1—biological techniques. Academic Press, San DiegoGoogle Scholar
  2. Akbarzadeh A et al (2009) Synthesis and characterization of gold nanoparticles by tryptophane. Am J Appl Sci 6(4):691–695Google Scholar
  3. Alidoust D, Isoda A (2013) Effect of gamma Fe2O3 nanoparticles on photosynthetic characteristic of soybean (Glycine max (L.) Merr.): foliar spray versus soil amendment. Acta Physiol Plant 35(12):3365–3375Google Scholar
  4. Almeelbi T, Bezbaruah A (2014) Nanoparticle-sorbed phosphate: iron and phosphate bioavailability studies with Spinacia oleracea and Selenastrum capricornutum. Acs Sustain Chem Eng 2(7):1625–1632Google Scholar
  5. AshaRani PV, Mun GLK, Hande MP, Valiyaveettil S (2009) Cytotoxicity and genotoxicity of silver nanoparticles in human cells. ACS Nano 3(2):279–290Google Scholar
  6. Asli S, Neumann PM (2009) Colloidal suspensions of clay or titanium dioxide nanoparticles can inhibit leaf growth and transpiration via physical effects on root water transport. Plant Cell Environ 32(5):577–584Google Scholar
  7. Biswas SK, Mohd NKP, Rajik M (2012) Inductions of defense response in tomato against Fusarium Wilt through inorganic chemicals as inducers. J Plant Pathol Microb 3(4):1–7Google Scholar
  8. Bone AJ, Matson CW, Colman BP, Yang X, Meyer JN, Di Giulio RT (2014) Silver nanoparticle toxicity to Atlantic killifish (Fundulus heteroclitus) and Caenorhabditis elegans: a comparison of mesocosm, microcosm and conventional laboratory studies. Environ Toxicol Chem 135:31–36Google Scholar
  9. Bukovac MJ, Wittwer SH (1957) Absorption and mobility of foliar applied nutrients. Plant Physiol 32(5):428–435Google Scholar
  10. Burman U, Saini M, Praveen-Kumar (2013) Effect of zinc oxide nanoparticles on growth and antioxidant system of chickpea seedlings. Toxicol Environ Chem 95(4):605–612Google Scholar
  11. Chao S, Choi H (2005) Method for providing enhanced photosynthesis. Jeonju, South KoreaGoogle Scholar
  12. Charitidis CA, Georgiou P, Koklioti MA, Trompeta A-F, Markakis V (2014) Manufacturing nanomaterials: from research to industry. Manuf Rev 1(11):1–19Google Scholar
  13. Chen B, Zhou D, Zhu L (2008) Transitional adsorption and partition of nonpolar and polar aromatic contaminants by biochars of pine needles with different pyrolytic temperatures. Environ Sci Technol 42(14):5137–5142Google Scholar
  14. Chung H, Son Y, Yoon TK, Kim S, Kim W (2011) The effect of multi-walled carbon nanotubes on soil microbial activity. Ecotoxicol Environ Saf 74(4):569–575Google Scholar
  15. Comini E (2013) Integration of metal oxide nanowires in flexible gas sensing devices. Sensors 13(8):10659–10673Google Scholar
  16. Cornelis G, Doolette C, Thomas M, McLaughlin MJ, Kirby JK, Beak DG, Chittleborough D (2012) Retention and dissolution of engineered silver nanoparticles in natural soils. Soil Sci Soc Am J 76(3):891–902Google Scholar
  17. Corredor E et al (2009) Nanoparticle penetration and transport in living pumpkin plants: in situ subcellular identification. BMC Plant Biol 9(45):1–11Google Scholar
  18. Cui H, Zhang P, Gu W, Jiang J (2009) Application of anatasa TiO2 sol derived from peroxotitannic acid in crop diseases control and growth regulation. NSTI-Nanotech 2:286–289Google Scholar
  19. Datnoff LE, Rodrigues FA, Seebold KW (2007) Silicon and plant disease. The American Phytopathological Society, St. PaulGoogle Scholar
  20. De La Torre-Roche R et al (2013) Multiwalled carbon nanotubes and c60 fullerenes differentially impact the accumulation of weathered pesticides in four agricultural plants. Environ Sci Technol 47(21):12539–12547Google Scholar
  21. Dimkpa CO, McLean JE, Britt DW, Anderson AJ (2013) Antifungal activity of ZnO nanoparticles and their interactive effect with a biocontrol bacterium on growth antagonism of the plant pathogen Fusarium graminearum. Biometals 26(6):913–924Google Scholar
  22. Dookhith M, Linares H (1998) A stabilized oil-in-water emulsion. United States Patent US5206021 A, Apr 27, 1993Google Scholar
  23. Duffy B (2007) Zinc and plant disease. In: Mineral nutrition and plant disease. The American Phytopathological Society, St. PaulGoogle Scholar
  24. Eichert T, Kurtz A, Steiner U, Goldbach HE (2008) Size exclusion limits and lateral heterogeneity of the stomatal foliar uptake pathway for aqueous solutes and water-suspended nanoparticles. Physiol Plant 134(1):151–160Google Scholar
  25. Elmer WH, Pignatello JJ (2011) Effect of biochar amendments on mycorrhizal associations and fusarium crown and root rot of asparagus in replant soils. Plant Dis 95(8):960–967Google Scholar
  26. El-Temsah YS, Joner EJ (2012) Impact of Fe and Ag nanoparticles on seed germination and differences in bioavailability during exposure in aqueous suspension and soil. Environ Toxicol 27(1):42–49Google Scholar
  27. Evans I, Solberg E, Huber DM (2007) Copper and plant disease. Mineral nutrition and plant disease, vol 177. The American Phytopathological Society, St. paulGoogle Scholar
  28. Gajbhiye M, Kesharwani J, Ingle A, Gade A, Rai M (2009) Fungus-mediated synthesis of silver nanoparticles and their activity against pathogenic fungi in combination with fluconazole. Nanomed-Nanotechnol 5(4):382–386Google Scholar
  29. Ganzleben C, Pels F, Hansen SF, Corden C, Grebot B, Sobey M (2011) Review of environmental legislation for the regulatory control of nanomaterials http://ec.europa.eu/environment/chemicals/nanotech/pdf/review_legislation.pdf. Accessed 8 Dec 2015
  30. Ghosh M, Bandyopadhyay M, Mukherjee A (2010) Genotoxicity of titanium dioxide (TiO2) nanoparticles at two trophic levels plant and human lymphocytes. Chemosphere 81(10):1253–1262Google Scholar
  31. Giannousi K, Avramidis I, Dendrinou-Samara C (2013) Synthesis, characterization and evaluation of copper based nanoparticles as agrochemicals against Phytophthora infestans. RSC Adv 3(44):21743–21752Google Scholar
  32. Gliga AR, Skoglund S, Wallinder IO, Fadeel B, Karlsson HL (2014) Size-dependent cytotoxicity of silver nanoparticles in human lung cells: the role of cellular uptake, agglomeration and Ag release. Part Fibre Toxicol 11(11):1–17Google Scholar
  33. Gogos A, Knauer K, Bucheli TD (2012) Nanomaterials in plant protection and fertilization: current state, foreseen applications, and research priorities. J Agric Food Chem 60(39):9781–9792Google Scholar
  34. Gonzalez-Fernandez R, Prats E, Jorrin-Novo JV (2010) Proteomics of plant pathogenic fungi. J Biomed Biotechnol 2010:1–36Google Scholar
  35. Gottschalk F, Sonderer T, Scholz RW, Nowack B (2009) Modeled environmental concentrations of engineered nanomaterials (TiO(2), ZnO, Ag, CNT, fullerenes) for different regions. Environ Sci Technol 43(24):9216–9222Google Scholar
  36. Guan HN, Chi DF, Yu JC, Li X (2008) A novel photodegradable insecticide: preparation, characterization and properties evaluation of nano-imidacloprid. Pestic Biochem Phys 92(2):83–91Google Scholar
  37. Guzmán MG, Dille J, Godet S (2009) Synthesis of silver nanoparticles by chemical reduction method and their antibacterial activity. Int J Chem Biomol Eng 2(3):104–111Google Scholar
  38. Hamdi H, De La Torre-Roche R, Hawthorne J, White JC (2014) Impact of non-functionalized and amino-functionalized multiwall carbon nanotubes on pesticide uptake by lettuce (Lactuca sativa L.). Nanotoxicology. doi:10.3109/17435390.2014.907456
  39. Hawthorne J et al (2014) Particle-size dependent accumulation and trophic transfer of cerium oxide through a terrestrial food chain. Environ Sci Technol 48(22):13102–13109Google Scholar
  40. He LL, Liu Y, Mustapha A, Lin MS (2011) Antifungal activity of zinc oxide nanoparticles against Botrytis cinerea and Penicillium expansum. Microbiol Res 166(3):207–215Google Scholar
  41. Hernandez-Viezcas JA et al (2013) In situ synchrotron X-ray fluorescence mapping and speciation of CeO2 and ZnO nanoparticles in soil cultivated soybean (Glycine max). ACS Nano 7(2):1415–1423Google Scholar
  42. Hong J et al (2014) Evidence of translocation and physiological impacts of foliar applied CeO2 nanoparticles on cucumber (Cucumis sativus) plants. Environ Sci Technol 48(8):4376–4385Google Scholar
  43. Hu X, Kang J, Lu K, Zhou R, Mu L, Zhou Q (2014) Graphene oxide amplifies the phytotoxicity of arsenic in wheat. Sci Rep 4:1–10Google Scholar
  44. Huang L, Li DQ, Lin YJ, Wei M, Evans DG, Duan X (2005) Controllable preparation of nano-MgO and investigation of its bactericidal properties. J Inorg Biochem 99(5):986–993Google Scholar
  45. Huber DM, Thompson IA (2007) Nitrogen and plant disease. In: Mineral nutrition and plant disease, vol 31. The American Phytopathological Society, St. PaulGoogle Scholar
  46. Ishaque M, Schnabel G, Anspaugh DD (2009) Agrochemical formulations comprising a pesticide, an organic UV-photoprotective filter and coated metal-oxide nanoparticles. United States Patent US20110111957 A1, May 12, 2011Google Scholar
  47. Jaberzadeh A, Moaveni P, Tohidi Moghadam HR, Zahedi H (2013) Influence of bulk and nanoparticles titanium foliar application on some agronomic traits, seed gluten and starch contents of wheat subjected to water deficit stress. Not Bot Horti Agrobot 41(1):201–207Google Scholar
  48. Jayaseelan C et al (2012) Novel microbial route to synthesize ZnO nanoparticles using Aeromonas hydrophila and their activity against pathogenic bacteria and fungi. Spectrochim Acta A 90:78–84Google Scholar
  49. Jin L, Son Y, Yoon TK, Kang YJ, Kim W, Chung H (2013) High concentrations of single-walled carbon nanotubes lower soil enzyme activity and microbial biomass. Ecotoxicol Environ Saf 88:9–15Google Scholar
  50. Jo YK, Kim BH, Jung G (2009) Antifungal activity of silver ions and nanoparticles on phytopathogenic fungi. Plant Dis 93(10):1037–1043Google Scholar
  51. Kanhed P et al (2014) In vitro antifungal efficacy of copper nanoparticles against selected crop pathogenic fungi. Mater Lett 115:13–17Google Scholar
  52. Khodakovskaya MV et al (2011) Complex genetic, photothermal, and photoacoustic analysis of nanoparticle-plant interactions. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 108(3):1028–1033Google Scholar
  53. Khodakovskaya MV, de Silva K, Biris AS, Dervishi E, Villagarcia H (2012) Carbon nanotubes induce growth enhancement of tobacco cells. ACS Nano 6(3):2128–2135Google Scholar
  54. Khodakovskaya MV, Kim BS, Kim JN, Alimohammadi M, Dervishi E, Mustafa T, Cernigla CE (2013) Carbon nanotubes as plant growth regulators: effects on tomato growth, reproductive system, and soil microbial community. Small 9(1):115–123Google Scholar
  55. Khot LR, Sankaran S, Maja JM, Ehsani R, Schuster EW (2012) Applications of nanomaterials in agricultural production and crop protection: a review. Crop Prot 35:64–70Google Scholar
  56. Kim H, Kang H, Chu G, Byun H (2008) Antifungal effectiveness of nanosilver colloid against rose powdery mildew in greenhouses. Solid State Phenom 135:15–18Google Scholar
  57. Kole C et al (2013) Nanobiotechnology can boost crop production and quality: first evidence from increased plant biomass, fruit yield and phytomedicine content in bitter melon (Momordica charantia). BMC Biotechnol 13(37):1–10Google Scholar
  58. Lahiani MH, Dervishi E, Chen JH, Nima Z, Gaume A, Biris AS, Khodakovskaya MV (2013) Impact of carbon nanotube exposure to seeds of valuable crops. ACS Appl Mater Interfaces 5(16):7965–7973Google Scholar
  59. Lai LK, Zhang YG (2011) The production of 5-hydroxymethylfurfural from fructose in isopropyl alcohol: a green and efficient system. Chemsuschem 4(12):1745–1748Google Scholar
  60. Lamsal K, Kim SW, Jung JH, Kim YS, Kim KS, Lee YS (2011a) Application of silver nanoparticles for the control of Colletotrichum species in vitro and pepper anthracnose disease in field. Mycobiology 39(3):194–199Google Scholar
  61. Lamsal K, Kim SW, Jung JH, Kim YS, Kim KS, Lee YS (2011b) Inhibition effects of silver nanoparticles against powdery mildews on cucumber and pumpkin. Mycobiology 39(1):26–32Google Scholar
  62. Larue C et al (2014) Foliar exposure of the crop Lactuca sativa to silver nanoparticles: evidence for internalization and changes in Ag speciation. J Hazard Mater 264:98–106Google Scholar
  63. Levard C, Hotze EM, Lowry GV, Brown GE (2012) Environmental transformations of silver nanoparticles: impact on stability and toxicity. Environ Sci Technol 46(13):6900–6914Google Scholar
  64. Linglan M, Chao L, Chunxiang Q, Sitao Y, Jie L, Fengqing G, Fashui H (2008) Rubisco activase mRNA expression in spinach: modulation by nanoanatase treatment. Biol Trace Elem Res 122(2):168–178Google Scholar
  65. Liu R, Lal R (2014) Synthetic apatite nanoparticles as a phosphorus fertilizer for soybean (Glycine max). Sci Rep 4(5686):1–6Google Scholar
  66. Lu C, Zhang C, Wen J, Wu G, Tao M (2002) Research of the effect of nanometer materials on germination and growth enhancement of Glycine max and its mechanism. Soybean Sci 21(3):168–171Google Scholar
  67. Ma XM, Wang C (2010) Fullerene nanoparticles affect the fate and uptake of trichloroethylene in phytoremediation systems. Environ Eng Sci 27(11):989–992Google Scholar
  68. Ma XM, Geiser-Lee J, Deng Y, Kolmakov A (2010) Interactions between engineered nanoparticles (ENPs) and plants: phytotoxicity, uptake and accumulation. Sci Total Environ 408(16):3053–3061Google Scholar
  69. Miralles P, Church TL, Harris AT (2012) Toxicity, uptake, and translocation of engineered nanomaterials in vascular plants. Environ Sci Technol 46(17):9224–9239Google Scholar
  70. Mittal AK, Chisti Y, Banerjee UC (2013) Synthesis of metallic nanoparticles using plant extracts. Biotechnol Adv 31(2):346–356Google Scholar
  71. Mohamadipoor R, Sedaghathoor S, Khomami AM (2013) Effect of application of iron fertilizers in two methods ‘foliar and soil application’ on growth characteristics of Spathyphyllum illusion. Eur J Exp Biol 3 (1):232–239Google Scholar
  72. Mueller NC, Nowack B (2008) Exposure modeling of engineered nanoparticles in the environment. Environ Sci Technol 42(12):4447–4453Google Scholar
  73. Naderi MR, Danesh-Shahraki A (2013) Nanofertilizers and their roles in sustainable agriculture. Int J Agric Crop Sci 5(19):2229–2232Google Scholar
  74. Navarro E et al (2008) Environmental behavior and ecotoxicity of engineered nanoparticles to algae, plants, and fungi. Ecotoxicology 17(5):372–386Google Scholar
  75. Nekrasova GF, Ushakova OS, Ermakov AE, Uimin MA, Byzov IV (2011) Effects of copper(II) ions and copper oxide nanoparticles on Elodea densa Planch. Russ J Ecol 42(6):458–463Google Scholar
  76. Ocsoy I, Paret ML, Ocsoy MA, Kunwar S, Chen T, You M, Tan W (2013) Nanotechnology in plant disease management: DNA-directed silver nanoparticles on graphene oxide as an antibacterial against Xanthomonas perforans. ACS Nano 7(10):8972–8980Google Scholar
  77. Paret M, Palmateer A, Knox G (2013a) Evaluation of a light-activated nanoparticle formulation of TiO2/Zn for management of bacterial leaf spot on Rosa ‘Noare’. HortScience 48(2):189–192Google Scholar
  78. Paret ML, Vallad GE, Averett DR, Jones JB, Olson SM (2013b) Photocatalysis: effect of light-activated nanoscale formulations of TiO2 on Xanthomonas perforans and control of bacterial spot of tomato. Phytopathology 103(3):228–236Google Scholar
  79. Patel N, Desa P, Pael N, Jha A, Gautam HK (2014) Agronatechlogy for plant fungal disease management: a review. Int J Cur Micobl Ap Sci 3(10):71–84Google Scholar
  80. Petersen EJ et al (2014) Identification and avoidance of potential artifacts and misinterpretations in nanomaterial ecotoxicity measurements. Environ Sci Technol 48(8):4226–4246Google Scholar
  81. Pradhan S et al (2013) Photochemical modulation of biosafe manganese nanoparticles on Vigna radiata: a detailed molecular, biochemical, and biophysical study. Environ Sci Technol 47(22):13122–13131Google Scholar
  82. Pradhan S et al (2014) Manganese nanoparticles: impact on non-nodulated plant as a potent enhancer in nitrogen metabolism and toxicity study both in vivo and in vitro. J Agric Food Chem 62(35):8777–8785Google Scholar
  83. Prasad TNVKV et al (2012) Effect of nanoscale zinc oxide particles on the germination, growth and yield of peanut. J Plant Nutr 35(6):905–927Google Scholar
  84. Priester JH et al (2012) Soybean susceptibility to manufactured nanomaterials with evidence for food quality and soil fertility interruption. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 109(37):14734–14735Google Scholar
  85. Rai MK, Deshmukh SD, Ingle AP, Gade AK (2012) Silver nanoparticles: the powerful nanoweapon against multidrug-resistant bacteria. J Appl Microbiol 112(5):841–852Google Scholar
  86. Raliya R, Tarafdar JC (2013) ZnO nanoparticle biosynthesis and its effect on phosphorous-mobilizing enzyme secretion and gum contents in Clusterbean (Cyamopsis tetragonoloba L.). Agric Res 2(1):48–57Google Scholar
  87. Ram Prasad VK, Prasad Kumar Suranjit (2014) Nanotechnology in sustainable agriculture: present concerns and future aspects. Afr J Biotechnol 13(6):706–713Google Scholar
  88. Rico CM, Majumdar S, Duarte-Gardea M, Peralta-Videa JR, Gardea-Torresdey JL (2011) Interaction of nanoparticles with edible plants and their possible implications in the food chain. J Agric Food Chem 59(8):3485–3498Google Scholar
  89. Rispail N et al (2014) Quantum dot and superparamagnetic nanoparticle interaction with pathogenic fungi: internalization and toxicity profile. ACS Appl Mater Interfaces 6(12):9100–9110Google Scholar
  90. Rodrigues DF, Jaisi DP, Elimelech M (2013) Toxicity of functionalized single-walled carbon nanotubes on soil microbial communities: implications for nutrient cycling in soil. Environ Sci Technol 47(1):625–633Google Scholar
  91. Römheld VMH (1991) Function of micronutrients in plants. Soil Science Society of America, MadisonGoogle Scholar
  92. Schonherr J (2006) Characterization of aqueous pores in plant cuticles and permeation of ionic solutes. J Exp Bot 57(11):2471–2491Google Scholar
  93. Shew HD, Fichtner EJ, Benson DM (2007) Aluminum and plant disease. The American Phytopathological Society, St. PaulGoogle Scholar
  94. Shrestha B, Acosta-Martinez V, Cox SB, Green MJ, Li S, Canas-Carrell JE (2013) An evaluation of the impact of multiwalled carbon nanotubes on soil microbial community structure and functioning. J Hazard Mater 261:188–197Google Scholar
  95. Sims JT (1986) Soil pH effects on the distribution and plant availability of manganese, copper, and zinc. Soil Sci Soc Am J 50:367–373Google Scholar
  96. Sonkar SK, Roy M, Babar DG, Sarkar S (2012) Water soluble carbon nano-onions from wood wool as growth promoters for gram plants. Nanoscale 4(24):7670–7675Google Scholar
  97. Stampoulis D, Sinha SK, White JC (2009) Assay-dependent phytotoxicity of nanoparticles to plants. Environ Sci Technol 43(24):9473–9479Google Scholar
  98. Suppan S (2013) Nanomaterials in soil. Our future food chain?. Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy, MinneapolisGoogle Scholar
  99. Swihart MT (2003) Vapor-phase synthesis of nanoparticles. Curr Opin Colloid Interfaces Sci 8(1):127–133Google Scholar
  100. Tarafdar JC, Raliya R, Mahawar H, Rathore I (2014) Development of zinc nanofertilizer to enhance crop production in pearl millet (Pennisetum americanum). Agric Res 3(3):257–262Google Scholar
  101. Thalmann B, Voegelin A, Sinnet B, Morgenroth E, Kaegi R (2014) Sulfidation kinetics of silver nanoparticles reacted with metal sulfides. Environ Sci Technol 48(9):4885–4892Google Scholar
  102. Tian YA, Gao B, Silvera-Batista C, Ziegler KJ (2010) Transport of engineered nanoparticles in saturated porous media. J Nanopart Res 12(7):2371–2380Google Scholar
  103. Tolaymat TM, El Badawy AM, Genaidy A, Scheckel KG, Luxton TP, Suidan M (2010) An evidence-based environmental perspective of manufactured silver nanoparticle in syntheses and applications: a systematic review and critical appraisal of peer-reviewed scientific papers. Sci Total Environ 408(5):999–1006Google Scholar
  104. Tripathi S, Sarkar S (2014) Influence of water soluble carbon dots on the growth of wheat plant. Appl Nanosci. doi:10.1007/s13204-014-0355-9
  105. Tripathi S, Sonkar SK, Sarkar S (2011) Growth stimulation of gram (Cicer arietinum) plant by water soluble carbon nanotubes. Nanoscale 3(3):1176–1181Google Scholar
  106. Vrček IV, Petlevski IZR, Pavičić I, Sikirić MD, Ćurlin M, Goessler W (2014) Comparison of in vitro toxicity of silver ions and silver nanoparticles on human hepatoma cells. Environ Toxicol: 1–14Google Scholar
  107. Wang Z, Xie X, Zhao J, Liu X, Feng W, White JC, Xing B (2012) Xylem-and phloem-based transport of CuO nanoparticles in maize (Zea mays L.). Environ Sci Technol 46(8):4434–4441Google Scholar
  108. Wang WN, Tarafdar JC, Biswas P (2013) Nanoparticle synthesis and delivery by an aerosol route for watermelon plant foliar uptake. J Nanopart Res 15(1):1–13Google Scholar
  109. Wani AH, Shah MA (2012) A unique and profound effect of MgO and ZnO nanoparticles on some plant pathogenic fungi. J App Pharm Sci 2(3):40–44Google Scholar
  110. Watson JL, Fang T, Dimpka CO, Britt DW, McLean JE, Jacobson A, Anderson AJ (2015) The phytotoxicity of ZnO nanoparticles on wheat varies with soil properties. Biometals 28(1):101–112Google Scholar
  111. Yang F et al (2007) The improvement of spinach growth by nano-anatase TiO2 treatment is related to nitrogen photoreduction. Biol Trace Elem Res 119(1):77–88Google Scholar
  112. Yang K, Lin D, Xing B (2009) Interactions of humic acid with nanosized inorganic oxides. Langmuir 25(6):3571–3576Google Scholar
  113. Yin L et al (2011) More than the ions: the effects of silver nanoparticles on Lolium multiflorum. Environ Sci Technol 45(6):2360–2367Google Scholar
  114. Zheng L, Hong FS, Lu SP, Liu C (2005) Effect of nano-TiO2 on strength of naturally and growth aged seeds of spinach. Biol Trace Elem Res 104(1):83–91Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Alia Servin
    • 1
  • Wade Elmer
    • 1
  • Arnab Mukherjee
    • 1
  • Roberto De la Torre-Roche
    • 1
  • Helmi Hamdi
    • 2
  • Jason C. White
    • 1
  • Prem Bindraban
    • 3
  • Christian Dimkpa
    • 3
  1. 1.The Connecticut Agricultural Experiment StationNew HavenUSA
  2. 2.Water Research and Technology CenterUniversity of CarthageSolimanTunisia
  3. 3.Virtual Fertilizer Research CenterWashingtonUSA

Personalised recommendations