10.1007@978 3 030 39978 8

Nanotechnology in the Life Sciences
Khalid Rehman Hakeem

Tanveer Bilal Pirzadah Editors
Nanobiotechnology
in Agriculture
An Approach Towards Sustainability
Series Editor
Ram Prasad
Department of Botany
Mahatma Gandhi Central University, Motihari, Bihar, India
Nano and biotechnology are two of the 21st century’s most promising technologies.
Nanotechnology is demarcated as the design, development, and application of
materials and devices whose least functional make up is on a nanometer scale (1 to
100 nm). Meanwhile, biotechnology deals with metabolic and other physiological
developments of biological subjects including microorganisms. These microbial
processes have opened up new opportunities to explore novel applications, for
example, the biosynthesis of metal nanomaterials, with the implication that these
two technologies (i.e., thus nanobiotechnology) can play a vital role in developing
and executing many valuable tools in the study of life. Nanotechnology is very
diverse, ranging from extensions of conventional device physics to completely new
approaches based upon molecular self-assembly, from developing new materials
with dimensions on the nanoscale, to investigating whether we can directly control
matters on/in the atomic scale level. This idea entails its application to diverse fields
of science such as plant biology, organic chemistry, agriculture, the food industry,
and more.
Nanobiotechnology offers a wide range of uses in medicine, agriculture, and the
environment. Many diseases that do not have cures today may be cured by
nanotechnology in the future. Use of nanotechnology in medical therapeutics needs
adequate evaluation of its risk and safety factors. Scientists who are against the use
of nanotechnology also agree that advancement in nanotechnology should continue
because this field promises great benefits, but testing should be carried out to ensure
its safety in people. It is possible that nanomedicine in the future will play a crucial
role in the treatment of human and plant diseases, and also in the enhancement of
normal human physiology and plant systems, respectively. If everything proceeds as
expected, nanobiotechnology will, one day, become an inevitable part of our
everyday life and will help save many lives.
More information about this series at http://www.springer.com/series/15921

Khalid Rehman Hakeem • Tanveer Bilal Pirzadah
Editors
Nanobiotechnology
in Agriculture
An Approach Towards Sustainability
Editors
Khalid Rehman Hakeem Tanveer Bilal Pirzadah
Department of Biological Sciences Assistant Professor
Faculty of Science University Centre for Research and
King Abdulaziz University Development (UCRD)
Jeddah, Saudi Arabia Chandigarh University
Mohali, Punjab, India
ISSN 2523-8027 ISSN 2523-8035 (electronic)

ISBN 978-3-030-39977-1 ISBN 978-3-030-39978-8 (eBook)
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-39978-8
© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

This work is subject to copyright. All rights are reserved by the Publisher, whether the whole or part of
the material is concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations, recitation,
broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission or information
storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar methodology
now known or hereafter developed.
The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this publication
does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant
protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use.
The publisher, the authors, and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in this book
are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publisher nor the authors or the
editors give a warranty, expressed or implied, with respect to the material contained herein or for any
errors or omissions that may have been made. The publisher remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional
claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
This Springer imprint is published by the registered company Springer Nature Switzerland AG
The registered company address is: Gewerbestrasse 11, 6330 Cham, Switzerland
This book is dedicated to
Fatima bint Muhammad Al-Fihriya

Al-Qurashiya,
an Arab Muslim woman who is attributed
with founding the oldest existing, continually
operating and first degree-awarding
educational institution for natural sciences
in the world, the University of al-Qarawiyyin
in Fez, Morocco in 859 CE. She is also
known as “Umm al-Banayn”
(Source: wikipedia.org)
Foreword
Agriculture is the backbone of developing nations and

provides employment to more than half of the work-
force. The agricultural land is shrinking in respect of
crop productivity due to land degradation, reduced soil
fertility, and low water accessibility. The excessive use
of chemical fertilizers and pesticides to increase the
crop yield is not safe for environment and human
health. In this regard, nanobiotechnology serves as a
freelancer to tackle the problems related to agricultural
sector. Nowadays, nano-agribusiness is an emerging
field to enhance crop yield, rejuvenate soil health, provide precision farming, and
stimulate plant growth. Thus, agri-nanobiotechnology plays a pivotal role in the
agricultural sector, without possessing any pessimistic impact on the environment
and biosafety issues.
This book Nanobiotechnology in Agriculture: An Approach towards Sustainability
published by Springer includes 13 chapters. Chapter “Nanotechnology: An
Overview” presents an overview on the methods of preparation of nano-engineered
active ingredients of fertilizers, pesticides and their formulation of nanocarriers for
their controlled release and targeted delivery. Chapter “Embodiment of
Nanobiotechnology in Agriculture: An Overview” deals with the embodiment of
nanobiotechnology in agriculture. Chapter “Nanotechnology: A Boost for the
Urgently Needed Second Green Revolution in Indian Agriculture” focuses on the
use of nanotechnology to boost the green revolution in Indian agriculture. Similarly,
Chapter “Role of Nanotechnology in Crop Improvement” deals with the basis of
crop improvement through nanotechnology. Chapter “Nanofertilizers: A Way
Forward for Green Economy”, by the joint authorship of Indian and Saudi Arabian
researchers, focuses on the various scopes and economic aspects of nano-formulations.
In Chapter “Nano-enabled Agriculture Can Sustain “Farm to Fork” Chain”, the
Indian author entails the vital role of nanotechnology to boost the agribusiness and
food industry for their sustainable development. Chapter “Nano- Biosensors:
NextGen Diagnostic Tools in Agriculture” by the Indian investigators discusses the
vii
viii Foreword
importance and practices of nano-biosensors as a next-generation diagnostic tool to

boost the agricultural practices, while Chapter “Development of Nano-formulations
via Green Synthesis Approach” deals with the development of nano-formulations
via green synthesis approach. However, Chapter “Nano-agrochemicals: Economic
Potential and Future Trends” focuses on the economic potentials and future trends
of nano-agrochemicals. Chapter “Pros and Cons of Nanotechnology” emphasizes
on the pros and cons of nanotechnology. Chapter “Nanoparticles: The Magic Bullets
in Mitigating Drought Stress in Plants” describes the role of nanoparticles in mitiga-
tion of drought stress in plants. However, Chapter “Nanotechnology: An Innovative
Tool to Enhance Crop Production” deals with the potential of agro-nanotechnology
to transform the agricultural and agro-business sector, while significances and
potentiality of CRISPR/Cas 9 as a new revolutionary science in agricultural and
horticultural sciences are summarized in Chapter “CRISPR/Cas9: A New
Revolutionary Science in Agricultural and Horticulture”. This volume includes vari-
ous aspects of agri-nanobiotechnology to resolve the issues related to global food
security, sustainability and climate change, nano-formulation, etc. to boost up the
agricultural and agribusiness sectors. I congratulate Prof. Khalid Rehman Hakeem
and Dr. Tanveer Bilal for their decent academic effort in bringing out this book.
Dr. Mohd. Sayeed Akhtar

Department of Botany
Gandhi Faiz-e-Aam College
Shahjahanpur, Uttar Pradesh, India
Preface
Agriculture is regarded as the backbone of the national economy of the developing

countries of the world as about two-fifth of their population depends upon agricul-
ture for their livelihood. The progress in agriculture sector plays a critical role in
population growth and economic forums as it produces raw materials for food and
feed industry. Currently, due to the growing population and other anthropogenic
activities, global agricultural production faces many challenges such as decreased
crop yield, soil fertility, soil degradation, low efficiency and labour shortages due to
expulsion from agriculture. In addition, losses of bioresources are occurring at an
alarming rate, with dramatic effects on people's livelihood. The population is pro-
jected to reach 9 billion by 2050, and it will be mandatory to generate at least
50–70% more production to feed such a large population. The exorbitant use of
conventional fertilizers and pesticides to increase production efficiency is of course
not an appropriate choice for the long term, as these fertilizers are considered as
double-edged sword, which increases crop yields but at the same time, they have a
detrimental effect on the soil microflora and thus reduce fertility. In addition, it
irreversibly damages soil texture and disrupts the balance of the food web in the
ecosystem, which can lead to genetic mutations in future generations. The increased
reliance on conventional fertilizers during and after the Green Revolution has
caused serious problems of sustainability and health risks.
To overcome the disadvantages of conventional fertilizers, bioformulations have
been created to revolutionize the agricultural sector because of their eco-friendly
nature and their cost-effectiveness. Nevertheless, this approach has also been con-
fronted with some problems, like short life span, stability, solubility, low absorption
efficiency by plants and the high dosage requirement. To combat these problems,
nano-formulations have received an overwhelming response due to superiority over
bioformulations. Nano-biotechnologies have thus become a promising tool to tackle
the above-mentioned problems, particularly in the agricultural sector, to combat
global food production and boost the agricultural sector. Nano-agribusiness is a new
field that improves crop yields, regenerates soil health, ensures precision agriculture
and stimulates plant growth.
ix
x Preface
In this book, we have tried to integrate literature focusing the issue related to
agricultural productivity, different practices to manage these issues and then the role
of the nano-biotechnology in environmental and agricultural sustainability. The
chapters in this book highlight importance of nano-biotechnology as an innovative
tool to enhance production yield and environmental sustainability.
We are highly grateful to all our contributors for readily accepting our invitation
for not only sharing their knowledge and research, but for venerably integrating
their expertise in dispersed information from diverse fields in composing the chap-
ters and enduring editorial suggestions to finally produce this venture. We greatly
appreciate their commitment.
We thank Springer-International team for their generous cooperation at every
stage of the book production.
Jeddah, Saudi Arabia Khalid Rehman Hakeem

Mohali, Punjab, India Tanveer Bilal Pirzadah
Contents
Nanotechnology: An Overview �� 1

Sheikh Tanveer Salam, Tanveer Bilal Pirzadah,
and Pervaiz Ahmad Dar
Nanotechnology: A Boost for the Urgently Needed
Second Green Revolution in Indian Agriculture�� 15
Kaizar Hossain, Syed Zaghum Abbas, Akil Ahmad, Mohd Rafatullah,
Norli Ismail, Gaurav Pant, and Maruthi Avasn
Nano-enabled Agriculture Can Sustain “Farm to Fork” Chain�� 35
Deepu Pandita
Role of Nanotechnology in Crop Improvement�� 63
John Mohd War, Mohammad Afaan Fazili, Waseem Mushtaq,
Abdul Hamid Wani, and Mohd Yaqub Bhat
Nanofertilizers: A Way Forward for Green Economy�� 99
Bisma Pirzadah, Tanveer Bilal Pirzadah, Aarifa Jan,
and Khalid Rehman Hakeem
Embodiment of Nanobiotechnology in Agriculture: An Overview �� 113
Tareq A. Wani, Gulzar A. Rather, Mudasar Ahmad,
and Zahoor A. Kaloo
Nano-Biosensors: NextGen Diagnostic Tools in Agriculture�� 129
Fayaz Ahmad Dar, Gazala Qazi, and Tanveer Bilal Pirzadah
Nanoparticles: The Magic Bullets in Mitigating
Drought Stress in Plants�� 145
Javed Ahmad, Sadia Qamar, Nida Kausar, and M. Irfan Qureshi
Nanotechnology: An Innovative Tool to Enhance Crop Production �� 163
Aarifa Jan, Tanveer Bilal Pirzadah, and Bisma Malik
xi
xii Contents
Development of Nano-formulations via Green Synthesis Approach �� 171

Tanveer Bilal Pirzadah, Bisma Pirzadah, Aarifa Jan,
Fayaz Ahmad Dar, Khalid Rehman Hakeem, Seema Rashid,
Sheikh Tanveer Salam, Pervaiz Ahmad Dar, and Mohammad Afaan Fazili
Nano-agrochemicals: Economic Potential and Future Trends�� 185
Gazala Qazi and Fayaz Ahmad Dar
CRISPR/Cas9: A New Revolutionary Science
in Agricultural and Horticulture�� 195
Quazi Mohammad Imranul Haq and Touseef Hussain
Pros and Cons of Nanotechnology�� 207
Waseem Mushtaq, Adnan Shakeel, Mohammad Afaan Fazili,
Ishani Chakrabartty, and Mustafa Sevindik
Index�� 223
About the Editors
Khalid Rehman Hakeem, PhD, is Professor at King

Abdulaziz University, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia. After
completing his doctorate (Botany; specialization in
Plant Ecophysiology and Molecular Biology) from
Jamia Hamdard, New Delhi, India, in 2011, he worked
as a lecturer at the University of Kashmir, Srinagar, for
a short period. Later, he joined Universiti Putra
Malaysia, Selangor, Malaysia, and worked there as
Postdoctoral Fellow in 2012 and Fellow Researcher
(Associate Prof.) from 2013 to 2016. Dr. Hakeem has
more than 10 years of teaching and research experience
in plant ecophysiology, biotechnology and molecular
biology, medicinal plant research, plant–microbe–soil interactions as well as in
environmental studies. He is the recipient of several fellowships at both national and
international levels; also, he has served as the visiting scientist at Jinan University,
Guangzhou, China. Currently, he is involved with a number of international research
projects with different government organizations.
So far, Dr. Hakeem has authored and edited more than 36 books with international
publishers, including Springer Nature, Academic Press (Elsevier), and CRC Press. He
also has to his credit more than 90 research publications in peer-reviewed interna-
tional journals and 55 book chapters in edited volumes with international publishers.
At present, Dr. Hakeem serves as an editorial board member and reviewer of
several high-impact international scientific journals from Elsevier, Springer Nature,
Taylor and Francis, Cambridge and John Wiley Publishers. He is included in the
advisory board of Cambridge Scholars Publishing, UK. He is also a fellow of
Plantae group of the American Society of Plant Biologists, member of the World
Academy of Sciences, member of the International Society for Development and
Sustainability, Japan, and member of Asian Federation of Biotechnology, Korea. Dr.
Hakeem has been listed in Marquis Who’s Who in the World, since 2014–2019.
Currently, Dr. Hakeem is engaged in studying the plant processes at ecophysiologi-
cal as well as molecular levels.
xiii
xiv About the Editors
Tanveer Bilal Pirzadah, PhD, is Assistant Professor

at University Centre for Research and Development
(UCRD), Chandigarh University, Mohali, Punjab,
India. After completing his doctorate (Bioresources;
specialization in Plant Stress Physiology and Biofuels)
from the University of Kashmir, Srinagar, India, in
2017, he worked as a lecturer at the Cluster University
Srinagar. Dr. Tanveer has about 8 years of research and
teaching experience in bioresources management, bio-
fuels, plant stress physiology, biotechnology and
molecular biology, medicinal plant research, plant–
metal interactions as well as in environmental studies.
He also has to his credit 20 research publications in
peer-reviewed international journals and 22 book chapters in edited volumes with
international publishers.
At present, Dr. Tanveer serves as an editorial board member and reviewer of
several international scientific journals. He is also member of the World Academy
of Sciences and Plantae group of the American Society of Plant Biologists. Currently,
Dr. Tanveer is engaged in studying the plant processes at proteomic, metabolomic
and molecular level to better understand the dynamic plant–metal interactions.
Nanotechnology: An Overview
Sheikh Tanveer Salam, Tanveer Bilal Pirzadah, and Pervaiz Ahmad Dar
1 Introduction
Nanotechnology was first used by Norio Taniguchi in 1974 and it is the art of
manipulating matter at the nano-scale because at this scale materials behave dif-
ferently because the rules that manage the behavior of the elements of our
known world start to give way to the rules of quantum mechanics, and every-
thing changes. The term “nano” is a Greek word meaning “dwarf” and it means
10−9 or one-billionth part of a meter (Thakkar et al. 2010). Due to small size
nanoparticles have some unique properties like higher charge density and reac-
tivity, more strength, increased heat resistance, decreased melting point, and
different magnetic properties of nano-clusters. Differences in the exposed sur-
faces of different nanoparticles lead to variances in atomic distribution across
the nanoparticles, which in turn affect the electron transfer rate kinetics between
metal nanoparticles and corresponding adsorbed species. These unique proper-
ties give the following advantages to nanoparticles in agriculture such as higher
solubility in suspension; higher penetration of seed coats and subsequently
emerging roots; better bioavailability of molecules to the seed radicals; provid-
ing actual concentration and controlled release of fertilizers or pesticides in
response to certain conditions; improved targeted activity and eco-friendly with
safe and relaxed transport (Pirzadah et al. 2019). Here, we summarize the gen-
eral overview and categorization of nano-formulations besides its applications
in the agriculture sector.
S. T. Salam (*) · P. A. Dar

Department of Zoology, Amar Singh College, Cluster University,
Srinagar, Jammu and Kashmir, India
T. B. Pirzadah
Assistant Professor, University Centre for Research and Development (UCRD),
Chandigarh University, Mohali, Punjab, India
© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020 1

K. R. Hakeem, T. B. Pirzadah (eds.), Nanobiotechnology in Agriculture,
Nanotechnology in the Life Sciences, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-39978-8_1
2 S. T. Salam et al.
2 Categorization of Nano-agrochemicals
Nano-agrochemicals have been categorized into the following types:
2.1 Nano-fertilizers
Nano-enabled fertilizers can be applied in agriculture through various forms. Some

of the potential approaches are explained as under:
Nano-composite Polymers
These are used to bind fertilizer nutrients into pellets to improve nutrient use effi-
ciency. Brazilian Agricultural Research Corporation (EMBRAPA) claimed that
they have observed in field experiment that by adding a nano-composite polymer
to urea, nitrous oxide emissions were reduced by more than 50% (Pereira et al.
2015). Some of the nano-composite polymers that can be used in fertilizers are
as under:
1. Polycaprolactone (PCL): It is easy and cheap to manufacture and has the techni-
cal advantage of being degraded slowly by micro-organisms like bacteria and
fungi. PCL is a polymer of choice used in slow drug delivery for implanted medi-
cal devices and this property can be explored by researchers to use PCL to help
in slow release of fertilizer nutrients.
2. Polyacrylamide hydrogel: It can be incorporated into pelletized fertilizers to
improve montmorillonite’s water retention performance, thereby reducing the
water usage in landscape gardening. However, as the polymer breaks down, the
resulting acrylamide is a lethal neurotoxin and carcinogen which can damage the
microscopic soil engineers like bacteria, protozoa, and fungi. Besides this acryl-
amide can be absorbed through the skin or inhaled, thereby posing serious risks
to fertilizer manufacturing workers and farmers.
3. Hydroxyapatite nanoparticle (HANP): Hydroxyapatite is a bioceramic com-
pound used in medical applications to provide calcium, phosphate, and other
minerals to bone and other hard tissues. Urea coated with HANPs slows the
release of nitrogen due to chemical bonding properties between nitrogen and
HA, increasing the plant’s uptake of urea. In the farm field trials using urea-
HA NP hybrids, about 50% reduction in urea use allows the yield to be main-
tained at about 7.9 tons/hectare, which is higher than the yields (7.3 tons/
hectare) for urea only rice crop using the recommended levels of urea
(Kottegoda et al. 2017).
Nanotechnology: An Overview 3
2.2 Nano-biosensors
These are embedded into biopolymer coating of fertilizers to release nutrients just
in time in response to the chemical signals from soil microbes like rhizobium in
plants root system. Application of nanotechnology to increase the control of the
plant over the release of nutrients was proposed in 2012 by a Canadian research
team as “Intelligent Nano-Fertilizer.” The application is based on the discovery of
root exudation of chemical signals in response to the decrease in the soil nitrogen.
The Intelligent Nano-Fertilizer project has shifted its focus from incorporating a
nano-biosensor in a polymer coating fertilizer to release urea, to a focus on increas-
ing macro-nutrient uptake efficiency by putting nano-biosensors in a polymer that
coats micro-nutrients like iron and zinc. This project has selected synthetic DNA
aptamers as nano-biosensors that fold into unique three-dimensional structures
capable of binding tightly to a target which here is chemical signals from the soil
microbes in the rhizosphere of a plant (Qureshi et al. 2018). The polymer becomes
more permeable delivering a payload of nutrients in response to the binding of
aptamer with the target. Nano-biosensors face the challenge of accurate identifica-
tion of specific signals by aptamer between the soil microbes and plant rhizosphere
because misidentification can lead to no or sub-optimal release of nutrients
(Neethirajan et al. 2018). Furthermore, if a polymer designed to be permeable in
response to the rhizosphere, chemical signal becomes less permeable or even imper-
meable because of the effect of target binding on the properties of the polymer, the
polymer would simply degrade, releasing the nutrient in an unintelligent fashion.
The impurities in the nutrient payload can lead to aptamer misreading the chemical
signal and binding incompletely with the target, leading to an inaccurate or partial
delivery of the nutrients.
2.3 Nano-clays
These are added to the soil samples to create soil micro-structures and reduce nitrate
loaded runoff and release of ammonia and nitrous oxide. One of the best examples
of use of nano-clays is the loss control urea (LCU), which is a ternary system com-
prised of attapulgite (nano-clay), polyacrylamide, and urea which has highest con-
tent of nitrogen among all commonly used fertilizers (Cai et al. 2014). The addition
of polyacrylamide, together with oxidation and hydrothermal processing of
attapulgite increases the pore space in soils with clay and stops erosion and water
runoff. Water soluble polyacrylamide is used as soil conditioner and without adding
polyacrylamide; attapulgite rods (20–50 nm in diameter and 1 μ in length) would
agglomerate and prevent creation of micro-structures to reduce nitrogen loss. It has
been observed that under stimulated conditions, about 50% leaching, 36% volatil-
ization losses, and 45% surface runoff of nitrogen can be reduced by this loss con-
trol technology (Cai et al. 2014).
2.4 Nano-pesticides
Nano-pesticides are in nanoparticle form so they can be easily taken up by plants

and can also be programmed to be time released (Lauterwasser 2005). Nano-
pesticide formulations are generally classified according to their intended purpose
into the following categories:
ormulations Aiming to Increase the Solubility of Poorly Water-Soluble

F
Compounds
The apparent solubility of poorly water-soluble active ingredients by making their

nanoparticles with a simultaneous change in solid structure resulting in increase in
the bioavailability of the active ingredients (Horn and Rieger 2001). Some of the
common pesticide formulations for poor water soluble active ingredients are as
follows:
1. Emulsifiable concentrates (ECs): These concentrates consist of active ingredients
dissolved in an organic solvent and a blend of surfactant emulsifiers to ensure
spontaneous emulsification into water in the spray tank. The main disadvantages
of ECs relate to the relatively poor stability after dilution (droplets of about
10 μm) and the use of organic solvents, leading to increases in the cost and flam-
mability as well as in dermal toxicity for the handlers (Knowles 2005).
2. Oil-in-water (O/W) emulsions: O/W emulsions have been proposed as an alterna-
tive to ECs. O/W emulsions generally consist of a mixture of a non-ionic surfac-
tant, block polymers, and polymeric surfactants. The limitation to O/W emulsion
is that emulsification requires a high-energy input, which is provided by high
shear mixers (typically producing droplets of 2 μm diameter) or high pressure
valve homogenizers (droplets down to 500 nm) (Knowles 2005).
3. Micro-emulsions: These are thermodynamically stable water-based formulations
consisting of (a) dissolved active ingredients in oil, (b) surfactant solubilizers
(blend), (c) a co-surfactant (often medium chain aliphatic alcohol), and (d) water
(Knowles 2005; Lawrence and Warisnoicharoen 2006; Green and Beestman
2007). Once formulation design is established, micro-emulsions form spontane-
ously upon addition of water and gentle stirring unlike classical emulsions where
preparation requires large energy input (Lawrence and Warisnoicharoen 2006;
Pratap and Bhowmick 2008). The particle size in micro-emulsions may be about
250 times smaller than typical pesticide particles and several reports have sug-
gested diameters of less than 100 nm (Knowles 2005; ObservatoryNano 2010).
Scattering techniques (light, neutron, and X-ray) and pulsed field gradient nuclear
magnetic resonance can be used to determine the microstructure of micro-
emulsions (Lawrence and Warisnoicharoen 2006). Micro-emulsions are available
in the market with different trade names like Primo MAXX (plant growth regula-
tor), Banner MAXX (systemic fungicide for broad-spectrum disease control in
turf and ornamentals), Subdue MAXX (systemic fungicide), and Apron MAXX
(disease protection for soybean; ObservatoryNano 2010). Micro-emulsions have

the following advantages over other formulations like ECs such as improved tank
mix compatibility; improved stability; reduced wear on equipment (e.g., prevent-
ing spray tank filters from clogging); low flammability (due to low solvent con-
tent in a continuous water phase (Knowles 2005; ObservatoryNano 2010); and
enhanced herbicidal efficacy due to the improved penetration or uptake of the
active ingredients that results from the high solubilizing power of surfactants
(Knowles 2005; Green and Beestman 2007). Besides applications of micro-
emulsions these also possess certain drawbacks like low active ingredient content
(<30%); high concentration (20%) of surfactants (Lawrence and Warisnoicharoen
2006); limited number of suitable surfactant systems and phytotoxicity and han-
dler toxicity issues (Knowles 2005).
4. Nano-emulsions: Nano-emulsions (also referred to as mini-emulsions, ultrafine
emulsions, and submicron emulsions are emulsions with a droplet size that can
overlap with those of micro-emulsions but micro-emulsions differ from nano-
emulsions in equilibrium status. Micro-emulsions are thermodynamically stable
but nano-emulsions have the tendency to separate into the constituent phases
(mainly by Oswald ripening). Nano-emulsions may nevertheless possess a rela-
tively high kinetic (meta-) stability (e.g., several years) (Gutierrez et al. 2008) and
are often said to be metastable. Nano-emulsion production requires high-energy
inputs but recent research has focused on developing a variety of reproducible
low-energy emulsification methods, which can be divided into the following two
main groups, viz., spontaneous emulsification methods and phase inversion tem-
perature methods (Anton et al. 2008). Nano-emulsions contain lower concentra-
tion of surfactants than micro-emulsions (typically 5–10% of surfactant compared
to about 20% in micro-emulsion) and many preparation methods include a step
that consists of diluting a micro-emulsion. The range of droplet sizes typically
quoted is 20–200 nm. Information collected by ObservatoryNano (2010) from
industrial representatives suggested that the use of micro-emulsions is likely to
dominate that of nano-emulsions (for which manufacturing opportunities have
not yet been developed) due to the more challenging preparation and stabilization
procedure required by the latter. However, it is possible that changes to the cur-
rent regulations (i.e., more stringent restrictions on the amounts or types of sur-
factants employed) will improve the potential of nano-emulsions as viable
alternatives.
5. Nano-dispersion: Dispersion of nano-crystals (crystalline or amorphous particles
consisting of 100% active ingredients) in liquid media leads to the formation of
nano-dispersions having similar properties to solutions (also called nano-
suspensions; Muller and Junghanns 2006). The approach aims to maximize the
surface area in order to increase the dissolution velocity and solubility saturation
of poor water soluble active ingredients. The greatest increase in solubility is
expected for crystals <50 nm (Muller and Junghanns 2006). A number of meth-
ods have been reported for preparing organic nanoparticles including dry/wet
milling, extraction precipitation, and solvent evaporation from emulsions (Elek
et al. 2010). Achieving stability over long periods is challenging and the addition
of surfactants or polymeric stabilizers is sometimes necessary (Muller and

Junghanns 2006). Elek et al. (2010) described a method that rapidly converted a
micro-emulsion of novaluron into powders consisting of active ingredients and
surfactants. Electron and X-ray diffraction showed that the nanoparticles were
amorphous. Amorphous particles are more soluble than crystalline particles
(Hancock and Parks 2000) and could thus be indicative of improved bioactivity.
However, an in vivo experiment on leaf worm larvae showed very similar insec-
ticidal activity for the nano-formulation to that of a commercial EC formulation
(Elek et al. 2010). In this context it is worth mentioning the nano-dispersion of
the antimicrobial agent triclosan reported by Weatherly and Gosse (2017). A
preparation method combining a processing technique of modified emulsion tem-
plating and freeze-drying resulted in the formation of stable dry powder compos-
ites that formed nano-dispersion upon addition of water. In contrast to the study
using novaluron (Elek et al. 2010), a higher biocidal activity was observed for the
nano-dispersion of triclosan than for an ethanol/water system (minimum inhibi-
tory concentration was eightfold lower for the nano-dispersion; Weatherly and
Gosse 2017).
3 ormulations Aimed for Controlled/Targeted Release and/

F
or Protect Active Ingredients Against Premature
Degradation
Slow/targeted release formulations are primarily aimed at active ingredients that

tend to degrade or move away from the target. However, there are also a few exam-
ples for active ingredients with low aqueous solubility. Some of these formulations
are described below:
3.1 Polymer-Based Formulations
The majority of polymer-based nano-formulations have the controlled release of

active ingredients as a primary objective. Polymer-based nano-formulations can be
used either as polymeric nano-spheres in which distribution of active ingredients is
not specified or as nano-capsules which exhibit a core-shell structure that can act as
a reservoir for active ingredients dissolved in a polar or nonpolar solvent (Anton
et al. 2008). Nano-capsules may present advantages over larger capsules in stability
of the spraying solution, increased uptake, increased spraying surface, and reduced
phytotoxicity owing to a more homogeneous distribution. However, it is a great
challenge to design capsules in the low nm size range while keeping the amount of
active ingredients sufficiently high relative to the amount of polymer forming the
core-shell structure. The distinction between nano-capsules and nano-spheres needs
to be borne in mind when considering the product most commonly taken as an

example to illustrate the potential (and related hazards) of sophisticated formula-
tions based on nanotechnologies (Friends of the Earth 2008). Syngenta holds a pat-
ent on a gutbuster capsule that breaks open in alkaline environments such as the
stomachs of certain insects (Syngenta 2000). Boehm et al. (2000) compared the
properties of nano-spheres prepared with various amounts of poly (epsilon-
caprolactone) to improve the delivery to plants. The release of the active ingredients
was immediate and followed a release profile similar to that of a classical suspen-
sion. Boehm et al. (2003) later tested the efficacy of similar nano-spheres loaded
with insecticide (average particle size of 135 nm and 3.5% loading rate) on cotton
plants infested with aphids. The speed of action and sustained release showed no
improvement over a classical suspension, but the small size of the nano-spheres was
shown to enhance the penetration of active ingredients in the plants and conse-
quently to improve the active ingredients. Liu et al. (2008) reported a method to
produce polymer-stabilized bifenthrin nanoparticles using a multi-inlet vortex
mixer to reach high super-saturation followed by rapid nucleation and growth of
nanoparticles (named the flash nano-precipitation process). The authors claimed
that this preparation method could be scaled up to produce formulations with the
potential to provide higher efficiency, better uniformity of coverage for highly active
compounds, and reduced exposure to workers (relative to compounds solubilized in
organic solvents). Kumar et al. (2010) and Shakil et al. (2010) recently proposed a
self-assembly preparation method using polyethylene glycol (PEG) and various
copolymers for the controlled release of insecticides. The diffusion-controlled
release rate of active ingredients could be adjusted by changing the proportions and
molecular weights of the polymers. Several studies have also proposed the use of
polymeric nano-spheres for the release of various fungicides for treating wood,
using conventional pressure treatment methods (Liu et al. 2001, 2002a, b, c; Salma
et al. 2010). Polymer nanoparticles can serve as a protective reservoir and diffusion-
controlled release carrier. The biocide can thus be released at the minimum rate
required to protect the wood, which results in longer protection and a reduction in
losses due to leaching. Salma et al. (2010) recently reported the development of a
novel approach aiming to tackle the weaknesses of the previously developed formu-
lations (by providing lower-cost ingredients, a single preparation step, and optimi-
zation of delivery and release rates). Amphiphilic copolymers of gelatin grafted
with methyl methacrylate were used to prepare nanoparticles of approximately
100 nm diameter loaded with tebuconazole. Leaching of active ingredients was sig-
nificantly reduced and antifungal activity was preserved for longer periods.
However, the novel formulation also exhibited significant aggregation that resulted
in less efficient delivery. Regarding pesticide activity, most formulations tested pro-
vide effective protection against fungal attack at relatively low application rates.
The surfactant-free formulations exhibited slightly greater biocidal efficacy, possi-
bly due to slower release, reduced leaching (Salma et al. 2010), and/or more uni-
form distribution within the wood (Liu et al. 2002c).
3.2 Porous Hollow Silica Nanoparticles
Researchers from China have investigated the potential of hollow silica nanoparti-
cles to be used as carriers for the controlled release and UV-shielding of avermectin
and validamycin (Li et al. 2006, 2007; Liu et al. 2006). The rate of release was
influenced by temperature, pH, and shell thickness. Although Li et al. (2007) men-
tioned the encapsulation of avermectin, the release profile exhibited a multistage
pattern which was interpreted as being due to the release of active ingredients
located in different parts of the particles (i.e., external, in pore channels, and in the
internal core). Prado et al. (2011) recently reported a method to modify hexagonal
mesoporous silica with carboxyl acid. The nano-spheres synthesized were <50 nm
(determined by thermogravimetry) and had a mean pore diameter of 10 nm (derived
from N2 sorption isotherms). The spheres were subsequently used as a support for
the controlled release of 2, 4-D and picloram. Faster release was observed for 2, 4-D
than for picloram (the release of 20% of active ingredients required about 7 and
20 days, respectively) but for both compounds, the delivery rate was maintained up
to 30 days. Mesoporous silica nanoparticles have also been considered as carriers to
transport DNA and chemicals into plant cells and leaves by bombardment (Torney
et al. 2007). The nanoparticles were loaded with genetic material together with
chemical inducer and the open ends were capped with gold nanoparticles to keep
the molecules from leaching out. Uncapping the gold nanoparticles released the
chemicals and triggered gene expression in the plants under controlled release con-
ditions. Further development of similar technologies will open new perspectives in
plant biotechnologies, with possible applications in the development of new plant
protection strategies. Zinc-aluminium-layered double hydroxides and clays layered
double hydroxides are good candidates to serve as a matrix for developing slow/
targeted release formulations of agrochemicals. Even though the term nano-hybrids
has often been used to describe layered double hydroxide formulations, size mea-
surements have generally not been provided and some electronic microscopy images
suggest that the resulting structures often belong to the μm range (Hussein et al.
2005). Although organo-clay formulations have also been classified as nano-
formulations (ObservatoryNano 2010), size measurements again suggest sizes in
the micrometer range (Maqueda et al. 2009). Park et al. (2010) evaluated the poten-
tial of a layered double hydroxide as a carrier for cinnamate, a natural antibiotic
substance that has the potential to be used as a fungicide. Natural antibiotics are
rarely used for pest control because they degrade rapidly in soil, need to be used at
high doses, and are often not readily available in large quantities. The formulation
tested by Park et al. (2010) resulted in a slow release of the antibiotic and a pro-
longed retention of cinnamate in soil. The formulation also showed promising fun-
gicidal activity against root rot in red pepper. Research teams in Malaysia and Korea
have investigated the influence of preparation parameters and the properties of
nano-hybrids consisting of double-layered hydroxides loaded with various anionic
herbicides, growth regulators, and fungicides. The addition of surfactants in a for-
mulation based on layered double hydroxides (with the primary aim of intercalating
the nano-ionic pesticide avermectin) resulted in the formation of structures with

dimensions of about 400–600 nm (based on transmission electron microscopy (Qiu
et al. 2009). The release of active ingredients was dependent on the pH, tempera-
ture, and presence of electrolyte (Qiu et al. 2009). Zhenlan et al. (2009) also reported
the incorporation of two neutral active ingredients after prior formation of micelles
with an anionic surfactant.
3.3 Nano-metals
Silver (Ag) has long been known for antimicrobial properties and several in vitro
studies have demonstrated that nano-Ag can significantly inhibit the growth of plant
pathogens in a dose-dependent manner (Chun et al. 2010; Jo et al. 2009; Jung et al.
2010; Kim et al. 2009; Min et al. 2009). Jo et al. (2009) showed that preventive
application of both ionic and nano-Ag can significantly reduce the development of
fungal diseases on rye grass (in vitro and growth chamber experiments at concentra-
tions of 100–200 mg/L). Maximum efficacy was observed when application
occurred 3 h before fungi inoculation. Efficacy was significantly reduced if applica-
tion occurred later than 24 h after inoculation (Jo et al. 2009). Jung et al. (2010)
carried out greenhouse experiments and showed that a weekly application of nano-
Ag solutions to the roots of cultivated green onions efficiently inhibited the develop-
ment of white rot. An increase in the rate of development of the treated plants was
also observed (after 4–5 weeks, 1.4–2.5-fold increase in biomass). In addition, plate
counting tests indicated that the application of nano-Ag did not appear to drastically
reduce the number of soil bacteria and fungi (Jung et al. 2010). Other suggested
applications of nano-Ag as a replacement for synthetic organic bactericides include
the coating of fruit bags to efficiently control the development of black stain on fruit
(Chun et al. 2010) and the treatment of cut flower stems to extend vase life (Liu
et al. 2009; Solgi et al. 2009). Silicon (Si) has long been known to enhance plant
tolerance of various abiotic and biotic stresses (metal toxicity, water stress, and
fungal attack) (Fauteux et al. 2005; Zargar et al. 2010) and the application of nano-
forms of Si (e.g., potassium silicate) is common practice. Surface modified hydro-
phobic nano-Si particles have been suggested as a potential candidate for the control
of a range of agricultural insect pests but no supporting experimental data has been
found in the literature (Nair et al. 2010). The efficacy of combined Si and Ag
nanoparticles stabilized with polymers has been tested in greenhouse experiments
on green squash plants infected with powdery mildew (Park et al. 2006). The anti-
fungal effects of nano-Si-Ag were observed almost immediately after application at
3 mg/L, and symptoms of infection had completely disappeared after 3 weeks. The
absence of phytotoxicity response was also demonstrated for several plants sprayed
with solutions of nano-Si-Ag concentrations of up to 3200 mg/L (Park et al. 2006).
Suggested benefits of nano-metals (and nano-Ag in particular) over synthetic fungi-
cides are a possible reductions in human toxicity, development of resistance (due to
the multiple modes of action of Ag), and plant protection related costs (Jo et al.
2009; Jung et al. 2010).
4 Nano-agrochemicals Versus Conventional Agrochemicals
Nano-fertilizer technology is very innovative technology intended to enhance the

efficiency of fertilizers as nutrient use efficiencies of conventional fertilizers hardly
exceed 30–35%, 18–20%, and 35–40% for N, P, and K, respectively. Nano-fertilizers
are nutrient carriers that are being developed using substrates with nano-dimensions
of 1–100 nm. Nanoparticles have extensive surface area and capable of holding
abundance of nutrients and release it slowly and steadily such that it facilitates
uptake of nutrients matching the crop requirement without any associated ill effects
of customized fertilizer inputs (Pirzadah et al. 2019). Nano-enabled fertilizers can
have the following advantages over conventional fertilizers such as:
4.1 Solubility and Dispersion of Mineral Micro-nutrients
Nano-sized formulation of mineral micro-nutrients may improve solubility and dis-

persion of insoluble nutrients in soil, reduce soil absorption and fixation, and
increase the bioavailability unlike conventional fertilizers which have less bioavail-
ability to plants due to large particle size and less solubility.
4.2 Nutrient Uptake Efficiency
Nano-structured formulation might increase fertilizer efficiency and uptake ratio of

the soil nutrients in crop production and save fertilizer resource, whereas in conven-
tional fertilizer applications bulk composite is not available for roots and decrease
efficiency.
4.3 Controlled Release Modes
Both release rate and release pattern of nutrients for water soluble fertilizers might
be precisely controlled through encapsulation in envelope forms of semipermeable
membranes coated by resin-polymer, waxes, and sulfur, unlike conventional fertil-
izers where excess release of fertilizers may produce toxicity and destroy ecological
balance of soil.
4.4 Effective Duration of Nutrient Release
Nano-structured formulation can extend effective duration of nutrient supply of fer-

tilizers into soil, whereas conventional fertilizers are used by the plants at the time
of delivery and the rest is converted into insoluble salts in the soil.
4.5 Loss Rate of Fertilizer Nutrients
Nano-structured formulation can reduce loss rate of fertilizer nutrients into soil by
leaching and/or leaking. On the other hand, in case of conventional fertilizers there
is high loss rate by leaching, rain-off, and drift.
5 Conclusion and Future Perspective
In conclusion, nanotechnology is an emerging field that plays a pivotal role in the

agriculture sector to enhance yield production and thus could be utilized as a novel
technology to reduce the food crises in near future. Many researchers foresee nano-
technology to develop high-tech agricultural fields, equipped with intelligent nano-
tools that allow limited inputs to get higher outputs. It helps to develop novel and
effective agrochemicals in the form of nano-fertilizers and nano-pesticides for plant
protection and nutrition and thus aids in sustainable smart agriculture. However,
future research should be focused to unravel the dynamic interactions between
plants and nano-agrochemicals and its impact on environment. Emphasis must be
placed on future research to explore ways to circumvent the risk factors associated
with the use of nanoparticles. The study of nanoparticle synthesis and the granting
of some limited applications to laboratory conditions could not contribute to the full
acceptance of nanotechnology in the agricultural sector. Therefore, the scientific
community must work together to improve future research based on a more realistic
approach.
References
Anton N, Benoit JP, Saulnier P (2008) Design and production of nanoparticles formulated from
nano-emulsion templates: a review. J Control Release 128:185–199
Boehm ALL, Zerrouk R, Fessi H (2000) Poly epsilon-caprolactone nanoparticles containing a
poorly soluble pesticide: formulation and stability study. J Microencapsul 17:195–205
Boehm ALL, Martinon I, Zerrouk R, Rump E, Fessi H (2003) Nanoprecipitation technique for the
encapsulation of agrochemical active ingredients. J Microencapsul 20:433–441
Cai D, Wu Z, Jiang J, Wu Y, Feng H, Brown IG, Chu PK, Yu Z (2014) Controlling nitrogen migra-
tion through micro-nano networks. Sci Rep 4(1):3665. https://doi.org/10.1038/srep03665
Chun JP, Choi JS, Ahn YJ (2010) Utilization of fruit bags coated with nano-silver for controlling
black stain on fruit skin of ‘niitaka’ pear (Pyrus pyrifolia). Hortic Environ Biotechnol 51:
245–248
Elek N, Hoffman R, Raviv U, Resh R, Ishaaya I, Magdassi S (2010) Novaluron nanoparticles: for-
mation and potential use in controlling agricultural insect pests. Colloid Surf A Physicochem
Eng Asp 372:66–72
Fauteux F, Remus-Borel W, Menzies JG, Belanger RR (2005) Silicon and plant disease resistance
against pathogenic fungi. FEMS Microbiol Lett 249:1–6
Friends of the Earth (2008) Out of the laboratory and on to our plates. Nanotechnology in food and
agriculture. Retrieved from http://www.foe.org/out-laboratory-and-our-plates
Green JM, Beestman GB (2007) Recently patented and commercialized formulation and adjuvant
technology. Crop Prot 26:320–327
Gutierrez JM, Gonzalez C, Maestro A, Sole I, Pey CM, Nolla J (2008) Nano-emulsions: new
applications and optimization of their preparation. Curr Opin Colloid Interface Sci 13:245–251
Hancock BC, Parks M (2000) What is the true solubility advantage for amorphous pharmaceuti-
cals? Pharm Res 17:397–404
Horn D, Rieger J (2001) Organic nanoparticles in the aqueous phase: theory, experiment, and use.
Angew Chem Int Ed 40:4331–4361
Hussein MZ, Yahaya AH, Zainal Z, Kian LH (2005) Nanocomposite-based controlled release for-
mulation of an herbicide, 2,4-dichlorophenoxyacetate incapsulated in zinc-aluminium-layered
double hydroxide. Sci Technol Adv Mater 6:956–962
Jo YK, Kim BH, Jung G (2009) Antifungal activity of silver ions and nanoparticles on phytopatho-
genic fungi. Plant Dis 93:1037–1043
Jung JH, Kim SW, Min JS, Kim YJ, Lamsal K, Kim KS, Lee YS (2010) The effect of nano-silver
liquid against the white rot of the green onion caused by Sclerotium cepivorum. Mycobiology
38:39–45
Kim SW, Kim KS, Lamsal K, Kim YJ, Kim SB, Jung M, Sim SJ, Kim HS, Chang SJ, Kim JK, Lee
YS (2009) An in vitro study of the antifungal effect of silver nanoparticles on oak wilt pathogen
Raffaelea sp. J Microbiol Biotechnol 19:760–764
Knowles A (2005) New developments in crop protection product formulation. Agrow Report.
Retrieved from http://www.agrow.com/multimedia/archive/00068/DS24368749a.pdf
Kottegoda N, Sandaruwan C, Priyadarshana G, Siriwardhana A, Rathnayake UA, Berugoda
Arachchige DMB, Kumarasinghe AR, Dahanayake D, Karunaratne V, Amaratunga GAJ (2017)
Urea-hydroxyapatite nanohybrids for slow release of nitrogen. ACS Nano 11(2):1214–1221
Kumar J, Shakil NA, Singh MK, Pandey A, Pandey RP (2010) Development of controlled release
formulations of azadirachtin: a employing poly(ethylene glycol) based amphiphilic copoly-
mers. J Environ Sci Health B 45:310–314
Lauterwasser C (2005) Small sizes that matter: opportunities and risks of nanotechnologies. In:
Report by alliance in co-operation with the OECD international futures programmes
Lawrence MJ, Warisnoicharoen W (2006) Recent advances in microemulsions as drug delivery
vehicles. In: Torchilin VP (ed) Nanoparticles as drug carriers. Imperial College Press, London
Li ZZ, Xu SA, Wen LX, Liu F, Liu AQ, Wang Q, Sun HY, Yu W, Chen JF (2006) Controlled release
of avermectin from porous hollow silica nanoparticles: influence of shell thickness on loading
efficiency, UV-shielding property and release. J Control Release 111:81–88
Li ZZ, Chen JF, Liu F, Liu AQ, Wang Q, Sun HY, Wen LX (2007) Study of UV-shielding properties
of novel porous hollow silica nanoparticle carriers for avermectin. Pest Manag Sci 63:241–246
Liu Y, Yan L, Heiden P, Laks P (2001) Use of nanoparticles for controlled release of biocides in
solid wood. J Appl Polym Sci 79:458–465
Liu Y, Laks P, Heiden P (2002a) Controlled release of biocides in solid wood. I. Efficacy against
brown rot wood decay fungus (Gloeophyllum trabeum). J Appl Polym Sci 86:596–607
Liu Y, Laks P, Heiden P (2002b) Controlled release of biocides in solid wood. II. Efficacy
against Trametes versicolor and Gloeophyllum trabeum wood decay fungi. J Appl Polym Sci
86:608–614
Liu Y, Laks P, Heiden P (2002c) Controlled release of biocides in solid wood. III. Preparation and
characterization of surfactant-free nanoparticles. J Appl Polym Sci 86:615–621
Liu F, Wen LX, Li ZZ, Yu W, Sun HY, Chen JF (2006) Porous hollow silica nanoparticles as con-
trolled delivery system for water-soluble pesticide. Mater Res Bull 41:2268–2275
Liu Y, Tong Z, Prud’homme RK (2008) Stabilized polymeric nanoparticles for controlled and
efficient release of bifenthrin. Pest Manag Sci 64:808–812
Liu JP, He SG, Zhang ZQ, Cao JP, Lv PT, He SD, Cheng GP, Joyce DC (2009) Nano-silver pulse
treatments inhibit stem-end bacteria on cut gerbera cv. Ruikou flowers. Postharvest Biol Technol
54:59–62
Maqueda C, Villaverde J, Sopena F, Undabeytia T, Morillo E (2009) Effects of soil characteristics
on metribuzin dissipation using clay-gel-based formulations. J Agric Food Chem 57:3273–3278
Min JS, Kim KS, Kim SW, Jung JH, Lamsal K, Bin Kim S, Jung M, Lee YS (2009) Effects
of colloidal silver nanoparticles on sclerotium-forming phytopathogenic fungi. Plant Pathol J
25:376–380
Muller RH, Junghanns JUAH (2006) Drug nanocrystals/nanosuspensions for the delivery of
poorly soluble drugs. Nanoparticulates Drug Carriers 1:307–328
Nair R, Varghese SH, Nair BG, Maekawa T, Yoshida Y, Kumar DS (2010) Nanoparticulate material
delivery to plants. Plant Sci 179:154–163
Neethirajan S, Ragavan V, Weng X, Chand R (2018) Biosensors for sustainable food engineering:
challenges and perspectives. Biosensors 8(1):23. https://doi.org/10.3390/bios8010023
ObservatoryNano (2010) Nanotechnologies for nutrient and biocide delivery in agricultural pro-
duction. Working paper, Available at http://www.observatorynano.eu/project/filesystem/files/
Controlled%20delivery.pdf
Park HJ, Kim SH, Kim HJ, Choi SH (2006) A new composition of nanosized silica-silver for con-
trol of various plant diseases. Plant Pathol J 22:295–302
Park M, Lee CI, Seo YJ, Woo SR, Shin D, Choi J (2010) Hybridization of the natural antibiotic,
cinnamic acid, with layered double hydroxides (LDH) as green pesticide. Environ Sci Pollut
Res 17:203–209
Pereira EI, da Cruz CCT, Solomon A, Le A, Cavigelli MA, Ribeiro C (2015) Novel slow-release
nanocomposite nitrogen fertilizers: the impact of polymers on nanocomposite properties and
function. Ind Eng Chem Res 54(14):3717–3725
Pirzadah TB, Malik B, Maqbool T, Rehman RU (2019) Development of nano-bioformulations of
nutrients for sustainable agriculture. In: Prasad R, Kumar V, Kumar M, Choudhary D (eds)
Nanobiotechnology in bioformulations. Nanotechnology in the life sciences. Springer, Cham,
pp 381–394
Prado AGS, Moura AO, Nunes AR (2011) Nanosized silica modified with carboxylic acid as sup-
port for controlled release of herbicides. J Agric Food Chem 59:8847–8852
Pratap AP, Bhowmick DN (2008) Pesticides as microemulsion formulations. J Dispers Sci Technol
29:1325–1330
Qiu DP, Li YH, Fu XY, Jiang Z, Zhao XY, Wang T, Hou WG (2009) Controlled-release of aver-
mectin from organically modified hydrotalcite like compound nanohybrids. Chin J Chem
27:445–451
Qureshi A, Singh DK, Dwivedi S (2018) Nano-fertilizers: a novel way for enhancing nutrient use
efficiency and crop productivity. Int J Curr Microbiol App Sci 7(2):3325–3335
Salma U, Chen N, Richter DL, Filson PB, Dawson-Andoh B, Matuana L, Heiden P (2010)
Amphiphilic core/shell nanoparticles to reduce biocide leaching from treated wood. 1.
Leaching and biological efficacy. Macromol Mater Eng 295:442–450
Shakil NA, Singh MK, Pandey A, Kumar J, Pankaj Parmar VS, Pandey RP, Watterson AC (2010)
Development of poly(ethylene glycol) based amphiphilic copolymers for controlled release
delivery of carbofuran. J Macromol Sci A 47:241–247
Solgi M, Kafi M, Taghavi TS, Naderi R (2009) Essential oils and silver nanoparticles (SNP) as
novel agents to extend vase-life of gerbera (Gerbera jamesonii cv. ‘Dune’) flowers. Postharvest
Biol Technol 53:155–158
Syngenta (2000) Base-triggered release microcapsules. U.S. Patent No. 6,544,540. Zhang HF,
Wang D, Butler R, Campbell NL, Long J, Tan BE, Duncalf DJ
Thakkar MN, Mhatre S, Parikh RY (2010) Biological synthesis of metallic nanoparticles.
Nanotechnol Biol Med 6:257–262
Torney F, Trewyn BG, Lin VSY, Wang K (2007) Mesoporous silica nanoparticles deliver DNA and
chemicals into plants. Nat Nanotechnol 2:295–300
Weatherly LM, Gosse JA (2017) Triclosan exposure, transformation, and human health effects. J
Toxicol Environ Health Part B 20(8):447–469
Zargar SM, Nazir M, Agrawal GK, Kim DW, Rakwal R (2010) Silicon in plant tolerance against
environmental stressors: towards crop improvement using omics approaches. Curr Proteomics
7:135–143
Zhenlan Q, Heng Y, Bin Z, Wanguo H (2009) Synthesis and release behavior of bactericides inter-
calated Mg-Al layered double hydroxides. Colloid Surf A Physicochem Eng Asp 348:164–169
Nanotechnology: A Boost for the Urgently
Needed Second Green Revolution in Indian
Agriculture
Kaizar Hossain, Syed Zaghum Abbas, Akil Ahmad, Mohd Rafatullah,

Norli Ismail, Gaurav Pant, and Maruthi Avasn
1 Introduction
Agriculture is one of the major sectors that provide food for human, indirectly or
directly in addition to feed, fibre, fire, and fuels. World agricultural industry is fac-
ing challenges such as climate change, urbanization, sustainable use of natural
resources, and other environmental issues including urban runoff and accumulation
of pesticides and fertilizers (Mukhopadhyay 2014). These problems are further
intensified by an alarming population and food demand increment as an estimated
population of 6–9 billion by 2050 is to be fed (Scott and Chen 2013; Chen and Yada
2011). India has targeted an average growth of 4% per annum for the agricultural
sector by 2020 (Subramanian and Tarafdar 2011). However, India’s agricultural
growth has been experiencing decline during the last decade from about 3.6%
(1985–1995) to less than 2% (1995–2005). Food grains production level is the
major concern. The per capita annual production of cereals has shown declination
from 200–205 kg in 1991/1995 to only 180–185 kg during 2004–2007, and it is still
in decreasing trends which leads to great concerns towards food security. In order to
achieve the 4% annual growth target, productivity and income per unit of these
K. Hossain (*)
Department of Environmental Science, Asutosh College (Estd.- 1916),
Kolkata, West Bengal, India
S. Z. Abbas · A. Ahmad · M. Rafatullah · N. Ismail
Environmental Technology Division, School of Industrial Technology, Universiti Sains
Malaysia, Gelugor, Pulau Pinang, Malaysia
G. Pant
Institute of Applied Sciences and Humanities, GLA University, Mathura, Uttar Pradesh, India
M. Avasn
Department of Biosciences and Biotechnology, Krishna University,
Machilipatnam, Andhra Pradesh, India

16 K. Hossain et al.
scarce natural resources such as limited land and water resource have to be improved.
The national agricultural research system has led the focus on the application of
eco-friendly and green revolution technology model in short-duration high yielding
cultivars, efficient irrigation, and intensive use of fertilizers and other agrochemi-
cals (Subramanian and Tarafdar 2011). The ‘First Green Revolution’ observed dur-
ing early 1970s ended in wonderful yield increase through four basic elements of
production system, viz. semi-dwarf high yielding varieties of rice and wheat, exten-
sive use of irrigation, fertilizers, and agrochemicals. Though, after wonderful
growth, there has been a distinct slowdown in the agricultural growth rate since the
mid-1990s. The agricultural production is facing a plateau, which has adversely
affected the livelihood base of the farming community at large. The green revolution
includes the implementation of micro-farm economics that directed the use of inputs
such as land, cultivar, labour, machinery, and chemicals balanced against profits
from crop yields and the macro-economic that ensured better access to inputs and
markets (Khot et al. 2012). The green revolution model has increased the potential
yields and farm incomes substantially, but less focus has been given on the efficient
and sustainable use of soil nutrients and water. Macro policies that favoured Indian
agriculture are affected by the globalization of agricultural trade. Local farmers are
subjected to greater market risks. Hence, lead to decline in income of farmers as
well as rural distress. Approximately about 60% of Indian work force is employed
in the agricultural sector and therefore, it is very important to increase and stabilize
agricultural income. However, there are many challenges faced by agriculture sector
such as degradation of soil health, water resources, overexploitation of natural
resources, excess use of fertilizers and pesticides that need to be addressed in near
future (Chen and Yada 2011). The worrying situation in Indian agriculture has been
described as ‘technology fatigue’. As the availability of arable land for agriculture
would reduce in future due to urbanization, the only way out could be expected
through productivity route. In fact, the country needs a ‘Second Green Revolution’
(Thakur 2009). In this background, the present paper attempts to investigate and
review whether nanotechnology can be used as a catalyst to initiate ‘Second Green
Revolution’ in India. Nanotechnology (NT) is said to possess high potential in
bringing revolution to our current agriculture and food systems as well as to improve
the conditions of the less privileged class (Roco 2003; Juma and Yee-Cheong 2005).
Combining nanotechnology with other measures may be answer to the worldwide
concerned sustainable issues in areas such as water, energy, health and environment,
agriculture and biodiversity, and management of our threatened ecosystem. In 2002
United Nations Johannesburg Summit on Sustainable Development, these five areas
have been identified and known as WEHAB (Report of the World Summit on
Sustainable Development 2002). According to a survey conducted by UN, improve-
ment in agricultural productivity especially in developing countries with the imple-
mentation of nanotechnology is considered as the second most vital area of efforts
in achieving the millennium development goals. On the other hand, energy conver-
sion and storage was identified as the top concern, while water treatment scored the
third in areas of focus (Slamanca-Buentello et al. 2005). Evidences from various
research conducted in many developed countries have inspired the study on applying
Nanotechnology: A Boost for the Urgently Needed Second Green Revolution in Indian… 17
nanotechnology into our current food and agriculture systems (Opara 2004; Ward
and Dutta 2003). Research conducted in many developed countries have indicated
the vast potential of nanotechnology in enhancing agricultural productivity through
genetic improvement ((Kuzma 2007; Scott 2007), specific targeted site genes and
drug delivery at cellular level (Maysinger 2007), nano-array based gene-technologies
for gene expressions in plants and animals under stress conditions (Walker 2005).
The potential is promising especially with incorporation of suitable technique and
sensors for precision agriculture, natural resource management, early detection of
contaminants in food products, smart delivery systems for agrochemicals, smart
system in food processing and packaging as well as other areas such as agricultural
and food system security monitoring (Day 2005; Moraru et al. 2003; Chau
et al. 2007).
Continuous developments in nanotechnology are expected to play the vital role
as main economic energetic forces for benefiting producers, farmers, ecosystem as
well as our society. More than 100 research projects on synthesizing and assembly
of ceramic particles, nanotubes, nanowires, nano-porous solids, nanostructured
alloys, and DNA chips have been supported along with establishment of a number
of shared facilities and infrastructure under this initiative. Some of the laboratories
are actively engaged in the research on design and synthesis of inorganic nanoma-
terials, especially in utilizing high Tc superconductors, magnetic materials, cataly-
sis, etc. (Hager 2011). If Indian agriculture is to achieve its broad national goal of
sustainable agricultural growth of over 4–5%, it is important that the nanotechnol-
ogy research is extended to the agricultural total production–consumption system,
i.e., across the comprehensive agricultural value chain. This would require focusing
on technologies that increase agricultural productivities, product quality, and effi-
cacy of resource usage that reduces the farm costs, raises the production value, and
increases farm incomes; as well as on conserving and enhancing the quality of the
natural resources. It would also require a conscientious effort in providing a system
to deliver these innovations based on nanotechnology to a product delivery stage
and ensure that these reach the rural stakeholders at the end of the agri-value chain
(Sekhon 2010).
The present study attempts to map out areas relevant to Indian agriculture, where
nanotechnology can provide viable solutions towards the challenges faced by our
agricultural industry. So we attempt in identifying areas where nanotechnology can
bring immediate impacts especially in Indian rural areas. Possible areas of nano-
technology with potential applications in Indian agriculture are: nanofertilizers that
possess slow release ability; nano-pesticides for controlled release; nano-emulsions
for greater efficiency; nanoparticles for soil conservation; smart delivery of nutri-
ents and drugs for livestock and fisheries; nanobrushes and membranes for soil and
water purification, cleaning of fishponds; and nanosensors for monitoring soil qual-
ity, plant health, and for precision agriculture and controlled environment agricul-
ture (National Planning Workshop 2003). Application of nanotechnology would be
possible in food processing industry such as nanocomposites and nano-
biocomposites for plastic film coatings used in food packaging, antimicrobial nano-
emulsions for applications in decontamination of food equipment, packaging, or
processing (Rai and Ingle 2012). We believe that the responsible development of
nanotechnology and nanomaterials in Indian agriculture must be accentuated as
application of nanotechnology and nanomaterials in agriculture and food systems in
global scale has been showing promising results.
2 pplications of Nanotechnology and Nanomaterials

A
in Agriculture and Food Sector
In the strategic Research Agenda 2007–2020 of the world technology platform on

Food for Life, nanotechnology is highlighted as key technologies both for tailor-
made food products and for intelligent packaging. Communities of all levels
(national, international, and civil society organization) are closely monitoring the
employment of nanotechnology especially in food and agriculture sectors.
Nanotechnology in the food area is perceived to be much more negative compared
with other applications such as surface treatments, medical applications, or energy
saving (Athanassiou et al. 2007) (Table 1). However, it must be noted that the use of
nanotechnology directly in the food industry is receiving higher level of awareness
compared to their applications in agriculture industry. Applications in agricultural
industry are rarely discussed and no longer in the priority interest of NGO-Groups
since 2005 (Grobe and Rissanen 2012).
3 Nanotechnology and Agriculture Sector
In terms of agriculture, nanotech research and development are likely to facilitate

and frame the next stage of development of genetically modified crops, animal
production inputs, chemical pesticides, and precision farming techniques. The
practice of nanotechnology in agriculture has been mostly theoretical but it has
begun and will continue to have a substantial effect in major areas of the food
industry, product development and design of methods and instrumentation for food
safety and bio-security purposes (Joseph and Morrison 2006). Recent advances in
material science and chemistry have produced mastery in nano particle technology,
with implications in the field of agriculture. With the focus of nanotechnology in
agricultural production, five major categories for nanotechnology applications are
listed as below:
• Sensors and diagnostic devices for monitoring environmental conditions, plant
and animal health
• Disease and pest control; including novel delivery systems for pesticides
• Water and nutrient control; including the use of novel delivery systems
• Genetic engineering of plants and livestock
• Agriculture as a means to produce nanomaterials.
Table 1 Application of nanotechnology in food science and its allied fields

Particle Preparation/synthesis
(nanoparticle) methods Main applications References
Organic Nano-precipitation, Enhanced nutritional value of Anton et al.
nanoparticle emulsion–diffusion, food, drug delivery/controlled (2008) and
(nanoscale double emulsification, release of drug, food Ezhilarasi et al.
vesicular emulsion–coacervation, enhancement, encapsulation of (2012)
system) polymer-coating, active components
layer-by-layer Recently a new class of Xiqi et al.
water-soluble red fluorescent (2014)
ONP have been prepared with
an application of cell imaging
which further can be used in the
development of nanosensors
Dye removal (remediation) Zhang et al.
from soil as well as water (2014)
fluorescent organic
nanoparticles that combine the
dye has been developed
Can be used in water
purification
Nano-sensor development for
water as well as agricultural
products
Inorganic Gas phase INP synthesis Antimicrobial agent, storage Athanassiou
nanoparticles method (flamed spray and packaging unit, catalyst, et al. (2007)
(INP) (inorganic synthesis, synthesis by tooth repair, and sensors
ingredients laser-induced gas production of metal NPs
manufactured at evaporation, and Cellulose-based bactericidal Márcia et al.
the nanoscale) plasma-based synthesis) nanocomposites containing (2012)
and liquid phase INP silver nanoparticles have been
synthesis method developed bactericidal
(co-precipitation method properties which may have
and sol–gel approach) future applications in active
packaging of food and
agricultural products
Also, silver NPs incorporated Siqueira et al.
into carboxymethylcellulose (2014)
films have been studied for
their antimicrobial properties
for food and agricultural
products and found suitable for
the same
They are having a role in Ranjan et al.
nanoreinforcement packaging, (2014)
smart packaging, etc.
(continued)
Table 1 (continued)
Particle Preparation/synthesis
(nanoparticle) methods Main applications References
Nano-clays They are synthesized Geology, agriculture, Garrido-
(NCs): mainly by top-down construction, engineering, Ramirez et al.
(fine-grained approach from suitable process industries, and (2010) and
minerals having materials environmental applications, in Carretero and
sheet-like drug products as excipients and Pozo (2009,
geometry) active agents, improve the 2010)
mechanical strength of
biopolymers
Recently NCs have been found Grasielli et al.
to have application in sensor (2012)
development
Nanoremediation—mainly Gholam et al.
dyes, pesticides, etc. (2013) and Yan
et al. (2014)
Used in the manufacture of Jin and Zhong
biodegradable nanocomposite (2013)
materials
Used in nanoreinforcement Aníbal et al.
packaging, nanocomposite (2014) and
active and nanocomposite smart Ranjan et al.
packaging (2014)
Nano-emulsions High-energy (high- Encapsulate functional food Ranjan et al.
(lipid phase pressure homogenization, components (2014), Astete
dispersed in an ultrasound, high-speed et al. (2009)
aqueous devices) and low energy and Finke et al.
continuous approaches (membrane (2014)
phase) emulsification, Increase bioavailability and Hira et al.
spontaneous bioactivity (2014), Ranjan
emulsification, solvent et al. (2014),
displacement, emulsion Joseph and
inversion point, phase Heike (2014)
inversion point) and Ghosh et al.
(2014)
Antimicrobial, anthelmintic, Karthikeyan
insecticidal, pesticidal, et al. (2011,
weedicidal 2012), Megha
et al. (2014),
Chaw et al.
(2013) and
Chaw Jiang
et al. (2012)
Nanoremediation Alexey and
Simon (2014)
and Shams and
Ahi (2013)
Sources: Modified from Dasgupta et al. (2014)
For this review, the first three sectors are discussed under the title ‘precision
farming’. Sensors and delivery systems are developed with the purpose of produc-
ing early, controlled, targeted, and more efficient interventions (irrigation, fertiliza-
tion, pest control, harvest). In addition, as fewer pesticides are lost during delivery/
application, adverse effects on the environment resulting from the accumulation of
harmful pollutants contained can be constrained and costs can be spared (Grobe and
Rissanen 2012). In accordance to Robinson and Morrison’s analyses, FAO and
WHO listed three main categories for the agricultural sector like nanosized agro-
chemicals; for smart delivery of agrochemicals in the field, better efficacy of pesti-
cides, better control over dosing of veterinary products, second water
decontamination; breakdown of organic pollutants, oxidation of heavy metals, elim-
ination of pathogens through use of nano-iron or other photocatalysts and animal
feed (use of nanosized additives, minerals, or vitamins) (Grobe and Rissanen 2012).
4 mart Delivery Systems for Pests, Nutrients, and Plant

S
Hormones
Plant parasitic nematodes are one of the world’s major agricultural pests, causing
a loss of about US$125 billion worldwide annually. Previously, nematode infesta-
tions were controlled by using nematicides which are toxic and are not eco-friendly.
These chemicals are either heavily restricted or eliminated entirely for use in the
United States due to their high toxicity. Therefore, research should be focused on
novel chemicals and smart delivery systems that will not only enhance the produc-
tion yield but are also eco-friendly in nature (Mousavi and Rezaei 2011). This
nanotechnology based delivery system has the ideal attributes for agricultural
application; it is robust and viable in a wide range of environments (Mousavi and
Rezaei 2011). Nanosensors and nano-based smart delivery systems can be used to
assist more efficient use of water, nutrients, and chemicals through precision farm-
ing. Through the use of nanomaterials together with global positioning systems
with satellite imaging of fields, farm managers could remotely detect crop pests or
evidence of stress easily such as drought (Fig. 1). Nanosensors dispersed in the
field can also help to detect the presence of plant viruses and to monitor the level
of nutrients in soil. Nano-encapsulated slow-release fertilizers are also receiving
lots of attention as they help to reduce unnecessary fertilizer consumption and to
minimize environmental pollution due to excessive use (Mousavi and Rezaei
2011). Some of the nanoparticles that have entered into the arena of controlling
plant diseases are nanoforms of carbon, silver, silica, and alumina-silicates
(Table 2). Nanoparticles of defined concentrations could be successfully used for
the control of various plant diseases caused by several phytopathogens (Kuzma
and Verhage 2006).
A B
µm
-5
0.2
0.36nm
SWCNT MWCNT 1-2 nm 2-25 nm
Fig. 1 Conceptual diagram of single-walled carbon nanotube (SWCNT) (a) and multi-walled
carbon nanotube (MWCNT) (b) delivery systems showing typical dimensions of length, width,
and separation distance between graphene layers in MWCNTs. (Source: Zheng et al. 2009)
Table 2 Nano particles which can use for controlling plant diseases
Nanoparticles Uses/Application References
Nano silver Nano silver is the most studied and utilized nano particle for Márcia
bio-system. It has long been known to have strong inhibitory et al. (2012)
and bactericidal effects as well as a broad spectrum of
antimicrobial activities
Silver nanoparticles, which have high surface area and high
fraction of surface atoms, have high antimicrobial effect as
compared to the bulk silver. Antifungal effectiveness of
colloidal nano silver (1.5 nm average diameter) solution against
rose powdery mildew caused by Sphaerotheca pannosa Var
rosae
It is being used as foliar spray to stop fungi, moulds, rot, and
several other plant diseases
Nano Alumino-silicate nanotubes with active ingredients are popular. Márcia
alumino-silicate The benefit of alumino-silicate nanotubes are sprayed on plant et al. (2012)
surfaces are easily picked up in insect hairs
Silica nanoparticles have shown that mesoporous silica nano
particles can deliver DNA and chemicals into plants, thus
creating a powerful new tool for targeted delivery into plant cells
Titanium dioxide TiO2 is harmless and no toxic so it can use in food products up Yao et al.
(TiO2) to 1% of product final weight (2009)
nanoparticles TiO2 photocatalyst technique has great potential in various
agricultural applications including plant protection since it has
non-toxic compounds and possesses great pathogen disinfection
efficiency
Carbon Carbon-based nanomaterials (such as single-walled carbon Jurgons
nanomaterials nanotubes (SWCNTs), multi-walled carbon nanotubes et al. (2006)
(MWCNTs), buckyballs, graphene, etc.) occupy a prominent
position in various nano-biotechnology applications (Fig. 1)
Magnetic Magnetic-based nanomaterials could be utilized for site- Mornet
nanoparticles targeted delivery of systemic plant protection chemicals for the et al. (2004)
disease treatment which affect only specific regions of plants and Jurgons
The carbon-based nanomaterials (such as SWCNTs and et al. (2006)
MWCNTs) are functionalized with magnetic nano particles can
be used in internal space allows filling of suitable plant
protecting chemicals and the functionalized magnetic nano
particles allow external control of the movement of nano
carriers inside the plant system
5 Nano-formulations for the Control of Plant Diseases
Nanotechnology provides new ways for improving and modifying existing crop
management techniques. Plant nutrients and plant protecting chemicals are used to
crops by spraying. Due to the difficulty such as degradation by photolysis, hydroly-
sis and microbial degradation, leaching of chemicals, only a very low concentration
of chemicals which is much below required minimal effective concentration, reach
the target site of crops (Singh et al. 2015).
5.1 Nanotechnology for Detecting Plant Diseases
There is a need for detecting plant disease at an initial stage so that tons of food can
be protected from the possible out-breaks. The Nanotechnologists have attempted
to look for a nano-solution for protecting the food and agriculture from bacteria,
fungus, and viral agents. It works as a detection method that can give results within
a few hours. The technology is very simple, portable, and accurate and does not
require any complicated technique for operation so that even a simple farmer can
use the portable system. If an independent nanosensors linked into a GPS system
for real-time monitoring can be distributed throughout the field to monitor soil
conditions and crop yield, it would be of great help. As per Sharon et al. (2010) the
union of biotechnology and nanotechnology in sensors will create equipment of
increased sensitivity, allowing an earlier response to environmental changes and
diseases.
6 Plant Pathogens in Biosynthesis of Nanoparticles
The research on nanoscience and nanotechnology essentially involves preparation

and use of nanoparticles of various elements and compounds. Among the several
uses, nanoparticles are also being used as antimicrobial agents for plant disease
management. Formation of nanoparticles can be achieved via several processes
which may be either chemical or biological.
6.1 Fungi
Fungi are relatively recent in their use in synthesis of nanoparticles. There has been
a shift from bacteria to fungi to be used as natural ‘nano-factories’ owing to easy
downstream processing, easy handling (Mandal et al. 2006; Pirzadah et al. 2019),
and their ability to secrete a large amount of enzymes. However, fungi being eukaryotes
are less amenable to genetic manipulation compared to prokaryotes. Therefore, any

alteration of fungi at genetic level for synthesis of more nanoparticles would not be
so easy. It is important to know the mechanism of synthesis of nanoparticles in
microbial systems to get better control over shape, size, and other desired properties
of the synthesized nanomaterials.
6.2 Bacteria
Among microbes, prokaryotes have received the most attention for biosynthesis of
nanoparticles (Mandal et al. 2006). Bacteria have been used to biosynthesize mostly
silver, gold, FeS, and magnetite nanoparticles and quantum dots (QDs) of cadmium
sulphide (CdS), zinc sulphide (ZnS), and lead sulphide (PbS).
6.3 Plant Virus
Plant virus especially spherical/icosahedral viruses represent the examples of natu-

rally occurring nanomaterials or nanoparticles. The smallest plant viruses known till
date is satellite tobacco necrosis virus measuring only 18 nm in diameter (Hoglund
1968). Plant viruses are made up of single- or double-stranded RNA/DNA as
genome which is encapsulated by a protein coat. The protein coat/shell structurally
and functionally appears like a container carrying the nucleic acid molecule as
cargo from one host to another. Their ability to infect, deliver nucleic acid genome
to a specific site in host cell, replicate, package nucleic acid, and come out of host
cell precisely in an orderly manner have necessitated them to be used in nanotech-
nology. A complete review on use of plant viruses as bio-templates for nanomateri-
als and their application has been recently reviewed by Young et al. (2008).
7 Amalgamation of Nanotechnology and Crop Biotechnology
Scholars have effectively created three-dimensional molecular structures, a break-

through that unites biotechnology and nanotechnology. The scientists prepared
DNA crystals by producing synthetic DNA sequences that can self-assemble into
a series of three-dimensional triangle-like patterns. The DNA crystals have sticky
ends or small cohesive sequences that can attach to another molecule in organized
fashion. When multiple helices are attached through single-stranded sticky ends,
there would be a lattice-like structure that extends in six different directions, form-
ing a three-dimensional crystal as illustrated in Fig. 2. This method could be use-
ful in improving important crops by organizing and linking carbohydrates, lipids,
proteins, and nucleic acids to these crystals (Lok 2010). The nanoparticles can aid
Fig. 2 (a) Stereographic image of the surrounding of a triangle; (b) Stereographic image of the
rhombohedral cavity (white lines) formed by the triangles. (Source: F. Torney et al. 2007)
as magic bullets, containing chemicals, herbicides, or and genes, which target spe-
cific plant parts to release their content. Nano-capsules can empower effective
penetration of herbicides through cuticles and tissues, allowing slow and constant
release of the active substances (Perea-de-Lugue and Rubiales 2009). Scholars at
the Iowa State University have employed a 3 nm mesoporous silica nanoparticle
(MSN) in delivering DNA and chemicals into isolated plant cells. MSNs are
chemically coated and help as containers for the genes delivered into the plants.
The coating triggers the plant to take the particles through the cell walls, where the
genes are introduced and triggered in a precise and controlled manner, without any
toxic side and after effects. This technique has been applied to introduce DNA
effectively to tobacco and corn plants (Torney et al. 2007).
8 Nanoparticles and Recycling Agricultural Waste
Nanotechnology can also help to prevent waste in agriculture, particularly in the

cotton industry. Nanofibres can be produced using electrospinning technique to spin
cellulose (C6H10O5), a complex carbohydrate composed of glucose units that makes
up 90% of the cotton material as nanofibres (Ranjan et al. 2014). When cotton is
handled into fabric or garment, some of the cellulose or the fibres are discarded as
waste or used for low-value products such as cotton balls, yarns, and cotton batting.
The process of electrospinning usually uses an electrical charge to draw very fine
fibres from a liquid. The application of current should be in high voltage with liquid
droplet, the body of the liquid becomes charged, and electrostatic repulsion counter-
acts on the surface tension. At this juncture, the droplets are stretched at a critical
point where a stream of liquid erupts through the surface as the Taylor cone and
forms a charged liquid jet. The elongation and thinning of the fibre resulting from
this bending instability leads to the formation of uniform fibres with nanometre-
scale diameters (Fig. 3). These high-performance absorbents allow targeted applica-
tion at desired time and location (Mousavi and Rezaei 2011; Bhattacharyya et al.
2014, 2015). In the past 2 years, the ethanol production from maize feedstock has
augmented the global price of maize. Cellulosic feedstocks are now observed as a
viable option for biofuels production and nanotechnology can also improve the per-
formance of enzymes used in the conversion of cellulose to ethanol. Researchers are
working on nano-engineered enzymes that will license simple and cost-effective
alteration of cellulose from waste plant parts into ethanol (Ranjan et al. 2014). Rice
husk, a rice-milling by-product can be used as a source of renewable energy. When
rice husk is burned into thermal energy, a large amount of high-quality nanosilica is
formed which can be further exploited in making other materials such as glass and
concrete. Since there is an incessant source of rice husk, mass production of nano-
silica through nanotechnology can alleviate the growing rice husk disposal concern
(Mousavi and Rezaei 2011).
Ohmic flow Convective flow
Taylor cone
Spinning tip
+ or –kV
Geometry of cone is governed
by the ratio of surface tension Zone of transition between
to electrostatic repulsion liquid and solid
Target
SLOW ACCELERATION RAPID ACCELERATION
Fig. 3 Diagram showing fibre formation by electrospinning (Source- Joanna Gatford 2008 The
New Zealand Institute for Plant and Food Research Ltd)
9 Nanotechnology in Food Sector
Two categories are often used to describe the broad field of nanotechnology applica-
tions in the food sector: First, ‘Nano inside’ for nutrients, food additives, or food
supplements with nanostructured ingredients or structures modified through the use
of nanotechnology; and second, ‘Nano outside’ for the use of nanotechnology in
food contact materials, including food processing, packaging, and sensor technolo-
gies. The World Health Organization (WHO) discusses the development of nano-
technology in the food industry, their current and potential benefits, and compares
them with conventional equivalents (FAO/WHO 2010). The applications of nano-
technology in the food sector are included in Table 3.
10 isk Assessment of Nanomaterials in Agriculture

R
and Food Sector
As the possible applications of nanotechnologies in agriculture and food industries

are manifold and still emerging, generic statements on their risks are not possible.
Risk assessment needs thus to be performed here—as in other fields of nanotechnol-
ogy too—on a case-by-case basis (FAO/WHO 2010). Several authors have indi-
cated that the knowledge base for common risk assessments is still too limited
(SCENIHR 2009). The members of scholars are concluded in its scientific opinion
on the potential risks arising from nanoscience and nanotechnology on food and
feed safety that the traditional risk assessment paradigm (hazard identification, haz-
ard characterization, exposure assessment, and risk characterization) can be applied
to (engineered) nanomaterials in principle (Horie and Fujita 2011). The US Food
and Drug Administration (FDA) published in 2012 a draft guidance document
including factors manufacturers should consider in manufacturing processes involv-
ing nanotechnology or nanomaterials which create a significant change such as:
affecting the identity of the food substance; affecting the safety of the use of the
food substance; affecting the regulatory status of the use of the food substance; or
warranting a regulatory submission to FDA (Krug and Wick 2011). Deficiencies
were identified in characterization, detection, and measurement of (engineered)
nanomaterials in food and feed and biological matrices, as well as in the availability
of information to toxic kinetics and toxicology, including optimal methods for test-
ing of (engineered) nanomaterials (Card et al. 2011). Overall, the scientific
committee sees the available data on verbal exposure and on any consequent toxic-
ity as extremely limited, as the majority of the available data comes from in vitro or
in vivo studies using other exposure routes. In addition, the current knowledge on
the exposure from applications and products in the food area was described as lim-
ited too, as well as the knowledge on their environmental impacts (Department of
Health and Human Services 2012 U.S.).
Table 3 Categorical uses of nanotechnology in food sector (FAO-UN & WHO 2010)
Category Area Function as Applications
Category-1 Nano- Nanostructured food Processed nanostructures in food or beverages
inside ingredients for improved taste or texture
Nanodelivery systems Nanomicelles, liposomes, or biopolymer-
for nutrients and based carrier systems that are used for taste
supplements masking of ingredients and additives, for
protection from degradation during
processing, for improvement of the nutrients’
or supplements’ bioavailability, for
antimicrobial activity, or for better optical
appearance
Organic nanosized For better dispensability of water-insoluble
additives for food, health additives in foodstuffs, enhanced taste or for
food supplements, and enhanced absorption, and improved
animal feed applications bioavailability in the body
Example—vitamins, colourants, flavouring
agents, and antioxidants
Inorganic nanosized Enhanced taste, enhanced absorption, and
additives for food, health improved bioavailability in the body,
food supplements, and including alkaline earth metals and non-
feed applications metals, silver, iron, silica, titanium dioxide,
selenium, calcium, magnesium
Category-2 Nano- Food packaging Plastic polymers containing or coated with
outside applications engineered nanomaterials for improved
mechanical or functional purposes
Nanocoatings on food Antimicrobial properties, for active or
contact surfaces self-cleaning surfaces. Surface functionalized
nanomaterials; adding functionalities such as
antimicrobial activity or a preservative action
(barrier properties)
Nanofiltration Filtrating of undesired components (tastes,
flavours, toxins, etc.) in food or clarifying
wines and beers, based on porous silica or
regenerated cellulose membranes
Nanosensors for food Incorporation of nanomaterials into intelligent
labelling inks, monitoring condition of the food during
transportation and storage (improving food
safety)
11 Socio-Economic Issues of Agricultural Nanotechnology
In consumer products, the appearance of the applications of nanotechnology has

also raised the ethical and societal concerns in some countries, starting from safety,
health, and environmental to consumer perception and intellectual property rights.
The public are not concerned about many applications of nanotechnology with the
exception of areas where societal concern already exists such as pesticides (Mousavi
and Rezaei 2011). During the last two decades, number of patent applications in
nanotechnology has increased more than tenfold in commercial sectors.

Nanotechnology is inescapable in different fields of applications and nano-based
developments could invade existing granted patents in those arenas. There are cer-
tainly already over 3000 patents internationally for potential agrochemical usage of
nanotechnology but they are most possible patents with broad claims, filed with the
scope of guarantee autonomy to function in the field in case of future commercial
developments (Sozer and Kokini 2009). In developing countries like India, the nan-
otechnology can have significant applications in agricultural sector like rice produc-
tion systems, food security, agri-biotechnology, input delivery, precision farming,
healthcare of animals, food industry, and water use.
12 Current and Future Developments
The current regulatory and public debate as well as NGOs activities, ‘nano inside’—
products where nanotechnology is directly applied to foodstuff will have a difficult
starting position and it can be taken into doubt if the communicational patterns of
the GMO-debate can be left behind without a quick and clear change of industries
communication strategies. For intelligent packaging and other applications of ‘nano
outside’ market acceptance could be easier if the key questions of risk assessment
concerning abrasion or uptake of nanoparticles from the packaging or food contact
materials are sufficiently answered. For applications in the agriculture sector the
future development is difficult to predict if it is becoming a part of the NGOs agen-
das, and as the fronts are not yet hardened, the agriculture industry is in a better
position to communicate transparently about the safety and sustainability of nano-
technological applications.
13 Conclusions
Nanotechnology is a potential technology to reduce pesticide use, improve plant

and animal breeding, and create new nano-bioindustrial products in agriculture sec-
tor. The positive side of it is that the proposed technology will be boom and gloom
to maintain the eco-factors of the agricultural field and the society in future however
needs a design of actual governing body and strong governance system. India is
basically an agrarian economy and has experience production boost during first
green revolution. But the agricultural growth rate is experiencing a plateau and there
is immediate need for enhancing agricultural productivity for maintaining self-
sufficiency in agriculture. Forty-four countries of the world including India are pur-
suing R&D for nanotechnological application in agriculture for alleviating
malnutrition and to achieve second green revolution. So far, it has been done mainly
for developed countries only and now it is up to the Indian researchers and scientists
to innovate and adapt them to suit the socio-economic milieu. The research in this
sector in India is still at a preliminary stage and also at a conceptual level to under-
stand realistic assessments. This critical evaluation and its potential assessment play
a significant role before it could be used in any sectors.
Acknowledgement The authors acknowledge Asutosh College, Kolkata, GLA University and
Krishna University, India, and Universiti Sains Malaysia, Malaysia, for providing world class
infrastructure to continue the research work.
References
Alexey SP, Simon B (2014) Continuous-flow production of a pharmaceutical nanoemulsion by

high-amplitude ultrasound: process scale-up. Chem Eng Process Process Intensif 82:132–136
Aníbal MS, María AB, Margarita A, María GG, Nelio AO (2014) Preparation and characterization
of montmorillonite/brea gum nanocomposites films. Food Hydrocoll 35:270–278
Anton N, Benoit JP, Saulnier P (2008) Design and production of nanoparticles formulated from
nano-emulsion templates — a review. J Control Release 128:185–199
Astete CE, Sabliov CM, Watanabe F, Biris A (2009) Ca2+ cross-linked alginic acid nanoparticles
for solubilization of lipophilic natural colorants. J Agric Food Chem 57:7505–7512
Athanassiou EK, Grass RN, Osterwalder N, Stark WJ (2007) Preparation of homogeneous, bulk
nanocrystalline Ni/Mo alloys with tripled Vickers hardness using flame-made metal nanopar-
ticles. Chem Mater 19:4847–4854
Bhattacharyya A, Chandrasekar A, Chandra AK, Epidi TT, Prakasham RS (2014) Application
of nanoparticles in sustainable agriculture: United States of America. pp 429–448. ISBN:
978-1-63315-205-2
Bhattacharyya A, Chandrasekar R, Chandra AK, Epidi TT, Prakasham RS (2015) Short views on
insect. Biochem Mol Biol 2:429–448
Card JW, Jonaitis TS, Tafazoli S, Magnuson BA (2011) An appraisal of the published literature on
the safety and toxicity of food-related nanomaterials. Crit Rev Toxicol 41:20–49
Carretero MI, Pozo M (2009) Clay and non-clay minerals in the pharmaceutical industry: part
I. Excipients and medical applications. Appl Clay Sci 46:73–80
Carretero MI, Pozo M (2010) Clay and non-clay minerals in the pharmaceutical and cosmetic
industries: part II. Active ingredients. App Clay Sci 47:171–181
Chau CF, Wu SH, Yen GC (2007) The development of regulations for food nanotechnology. Trends
Food Sci Technol 18:269–280
Chaw Jiang L, Basri M, Omar D, Abdul Rahman MB, Salleh AB, Raja Abdul Rahman RNZ,
Selamat A (2012) Green nano-emulsion intervention for water-soluble glyphosate isopropyl-
amine (IPA) formulations in controlling Eleusine indica (E. indica). Pesticide Biochem Physiol
102(1):19–29
Chaw LJ, Basri M, Omar D, Abdul RMB, Salleh AB, Raja ARRN (2013) Green nanoemulsion-
laden glyphosate isopropylamine formulation in suppressing creeping foxglove (A. ganget-
ica), slender button weed (D. ocimifolia) and buffalo grass (P. conjugatum). Pest Manag Sci
69:104–111
Chen H, Yada R (2011) Nanotechnologies in agriculture: new tools for sustainable development.
Trends Food Sci Technol 22:585–594
Dasgupta N, Ranjana S, Mundekkada D, Ramalingama C, Shankerb R, Kumarb A (2014)
Nanotechnology in agro-food: from field to plate. Food Res Int 69:381–400
Day W (2005) Engineering precision into variable biological systems. Ann Appl Biol 46:155–162
Electrospinning Diagram.jpg (2008) Diagram by Joanna Gatford at The New Zealand Institute for
Plant and Food Research Ltd. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Electrospinning_Diagram.jpg
Ezhilarasi PN, Karthik P, Chhanwal N, Anandharamakrishnan C (2012) Nanoencapsulation
techniques for food bioactive components: a review. Food Bioprocess Technol 6:628–647
FAO/WHO (2010) Expert meeting on the application of nanotechnologies in the food and agricul-
ture sectors: potential food safety implications. Meeting report. FAO, WHO, Rome, pp 99–102
Finke JH, Svea N, Claudia R, Thomas G, Arno K, Stephanus B et al (2014) Multiple orifices in
customized microsystem high-pressure emulsification: the impact of design and counter pres-
sure on homogenization efficiency. Chem Eng J 248:107–121
Garrido-Ramirez EG, Theng BKG, Mora ML (2010) Clays and oxide minerals as catalysts and
nanocatalysts in Fenton-like reactions — a review. Appl Clay Sci 47:182–192
Gholam RM, Javad H, Zeinab R, Shiva K, Hossein E (2013) Nanocomposite hydrogel from graft-
ing of acrylamide onto HPMC using sodium montmorillonite nanoclay and removal of crystal
violet dye. Cellulose 20:2591–2604
Ghosh V, Amitava M, Natarajan C (2014) Eugenol-loaded antimicrobial nanoemulsion preserves
fruit juice against microbial spoilage. Colloids Surf B: Biointerfaces 114:392–397
Grasielli CO, Sally KM, Marilza C, Ailton JT, Juliana P, Márcia RLM et al (2012) Biosensor
based on atemoya peroxidase immobilised on modified nanoclay for glyphosate biomonitor-
ing. Talanta 98:130–136
Grobe A, Rissanen ME (2012) Nanotechnologies in agriculture and food-an overview of different
fields of application, risk assessment and public perception. Recent Pat Food Nutr Agric 4:176–186
Hager H (2011) Nanotechnology in agriculture. http://www.topcropmanager.com
Hira C, Bapi G, Sanmoy K, Easha B, Goutam D, Rajib B et al (2014) Improvement of cellular
uptake, in vitro antitumor activity and sustained release profile with increased bioavailability
from a nanoemulsion platform. Int J Pharm 460:131–143
Hoglund S (1968) Some electron microscopic studies on the satellite tobacco necrosis virus and its
IgG-antibody. J Gen Virol 2:427–436
Horie M, Fujita K (2011) Toxicity of metal oxides nanoparticles. Adv Mol Toxicol 5:145–178
Jin M, Zhong Q (2013) Transglutaminase cross-linking to enhance elastic properties of soy protein
hydrogels with intercalated montmorillonite nanoclay. J Food Eng 115:33–40
Joseph S, Heike B (2014) Evaluation of Shirasu Porous Glass (SPG) membrane emulsification for
the preparation of colloidal lipid drug carrier dispersions. Eur J Pharm Biopharm 87:178–186
Joseph T, Morrison M (2006) Nanotechnology in agriculture and food. Nanoforum Report.
Institute of Nanotechnology, Evanston, pp 1–13
Juma C, Yee-Cheong L (2005) Innovation: applying knowledge and development. Report of
the United Nations Millennium Project Task Force on Science, Technology and Innovation.
Earthscan, London, p 69
Jurgons R, Seliger C, Hilpert A, Trahms L, Odenbach S, Alexiou C (2006) Drug loaded magnetic
nanoparticles for cancer therapy. J Phys Condens Matter 18:S2893–S2902
Karthikeyan R, Bennett TA, Ralph RH, Valerie AL (2011) Antimicrobial activity of nanoemulsion
on cariogenic Streptococcus mutans. Arch Oral Biol 56:437–445
Karthikeyan R, Bennett TA, Ralph HR, Valerie AL (2012) Antimicrobial activity of nanoemulsion
on cariogenic planktonic and biofilm organisms. Arch Oral Biol 57:15–22
Khot LR, Sankaran S, Maja JM, Ehsani R, Schuster EW (2012) Applications of nanomaterials in
agricultural production and crop protection: a review. Crop Prot 35:64–70
Krug HF, Wick P (2011) Nanotoxikologie – eine interdisziplinäre Herausforderung. Angew Chem
123:1294–1314
Kuzma J (2007) Moving forward responsibly: oversight for the nanotechnology-biology interface.
J Nanopart Res 9:165–182
Kuzma J, Verhage P (2006) Nanotechnology in agriculture and food production: anticipated appli-
cations. Project on emerging nanotechnologies and the consortium on law, values and health
and life sciences. Centre for Science, Technology and Public Policy (CSTPP), Karnataka
Lok C (2010) Nanotechnology: small wonders. Nature 467(7311):18–21. https://doi.org/10.1038/

467018a
Mandal D, Bolander ME, Mukhopadhyay D, Sarkar G, Mukherjee P (2006) The use of micro-
organisms for the formation of metal nanoparticles and their application. Appl Microbiol
Biotechnol 69:485–492
Márcia DM, Luiz HCM, Valtencir Z (2012) Development of cellulose-based bactericidal nano-
composites containing silver nanoparticles and their use as active food packaging. J Food Eng
109:520–524
Maysinger D (2007) Nanoparticles and cells: good companions and doomed partnerships. Org
Biomol Chem 5:2335–2342
Megha P, Saurabh D, Patanjali PK, Naik SN, Satyawati S (2014) Insecticidal activity of eucalyptus
oil nanoemulsion with Karanja and Jatropha aqueous filtrates. Int Biodeterior Biodegradation
91:119–127
Moraru CI, Panchapakesan CP, Huang Q, Takhistov P, Sean Liu S, Kokini JL (2003)
Nanotechnology: a new frontier in food science. Food Technol 57(12):24–29
Mornet S, Vasseur S, Grasset F, Duguet E (2004) Magnetic nanoparticle design for medical diag-
nosis and therapy. J Mater Chem 14:2161–2175
Mousavi SR, Rezaei M (2011) Nanotechnology in agriculture and food production. J Appl Environ
Biol Sci 1:414–419
Mukhopadhyay SS (2014) Nanotechnology in agriculture: prospects and constraints. Nanotechnol
Sci Appl 7:63–71
National Planning Workshop (2003) Nanoscale science and engineering for agriculture and food
systems. Report of National Planning Workshop on November 18–19, 2002 at Washington
Opara L (2004) Emerging technological innovation triad for smart agriculture in the 21st century.
Part I. Prospects and impacts of nanotechnology in agriculture. Agricultural engineering interna-
tional: the CIGR journal of scientific research and development. Invited Overview Paper. Vol. VI
Perea-de-Lugue A, Rubiales D (2009) Nanotechnology for parasitic plant control. Pest Manag Sci
J 65(5):540–545. https://doi.org/10.1002/ps.1732
Pirzadah TB, Malik B, Maqbool T, Rehman RU (2019) Development of Nano-bioformulations
of nutrients for sustainable agriculture. In: Prasad R, Kumar V, Kumar M, Choudhary D (eds)
pp 381–394
Rai M, Ingle A (2012) Role of nanotechnology in agriculture with special reference to manage-
ment of insect pests. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 94:287–293
Ranjan S, Dasgupta N, Chakraborty AR, Samuel SM, Ramalingam C, Shanker R, Kumar A (2014)
Nanoscience and nanotechnologies in food industries: opportunities and research trends. J
Nanopart Res 16:2464. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11051-014-2464-5
Report of the World Summit on Sustainable Development (2002) United Nations, New York
Roco MC (2003) Broader societal issues of nanotechnology. J Nanopart Res 5(3–4):181–189
Scientific Committee on Emerging and Newly Identified Health Risks (SCENIHR) (2009) Risk
assessment of products of nanotechnologies. European Commission, Brussels
Scott NR (2007) Nanoscience in veterinary medicine. Vet Res Commun 31(Suppl):139–144
Scott N, Chen H (2013) Nanoscale science and engineering for agriculture and food systems. Ind
Sekhon BS (2010) Food nanotechnology – an overview. Nanotechnol Sci Appl 3:1–15
Shams K, Ahi H (2013) Synthesis of 5A zeolite nanocrystals using kaolin via nanoemulsion-
ultrasonic technique and study of its sorption using a known kerosene cut. Microporous
Mesoporous Mater 180:61–70
Sharon M, Choudhary AK, Kumar R (2010) Nanotechnology in agricultural diseases and food
safety. J Phytology 2:83–92
Singh S, Singh BK, Yadav SM, Gupta AK (2015) Applications of nanotechnology in agricultural
and their role in disease management. Res J Nanosci Nanotechnol 5(1):1–5
Siqueira MC, Coelho GF, De-Moura MR, Bresolin JD, Hubinger SZ, Marconcini JM (2014)
Evaluation of antimicrobial activity of silver nanoparticles for carboxymethylcellulose film
applications in food packaging. J Nanosci Nanotechnol 14:5512–5517
Slamanca-Buentello F, Persad DL, Court EB, Martin DK, Daar AS, Singer PA (2005)
Nanotechnology and the developing world. PLoS Med 2(5):e97. https://doi.org/10.1371/jour-
nal.pmed.0020097
Sozer N, Kokini JL (2009) Nanotechnology and its applications in the food sector. Trends
Subramanian KS, Tarafdar JC (2011) Prospects of nanotechnology in Indian farming. Indian J
Agric Sci 8:887–893
Thakur TC (2009) Technological advances in soil cultivation and nutrient management in rainfed
agriculture, Theme paper on engineering intervention for sustainable rainfed agriculture of
43rd annual convention of Indian Society of Agricultural Engineers held between February
15–17, 2009 at Birsa Agricultural University, Ranchi
Torney F, Trewyn B, Lin V, Wang K (2007) Mesoporous silica nanoparticles deliver DNA and
Walker L (2005) Nanotechnology for agriculture, food and the environment. Presentation at
nanotechnology biology interface: exploring models for oversight. University of Minnesota.
September 15
Ward HC, Dutta J (2003) Nanotechnology for agriculture and food systems-a view. Proc. of the
2nd international conference on innovations in food processing technology and engineering,
Bangkok, 11–13
Xiqi Z, Xiaoyong Z, Bin Y, Yaling Z, Yen W (2014) A new class of red fluorescent organic nanopar-
ticles: noncovalent fabrication and cell imaging applications. ACS Appl Mater Interfaces
6:3600–3606
Yan LC, Andrew G, Stephen G, Mikel D (2014) Enhanced abrasion resistant PVDF/ nanoclay hol-
low fibre composite membranes for water treatment. J Membr Sci 449:146–157
Yao KS, Li SJ, Tzeng KC, Cheng TC, Chang CY et al (2009) Fluorescence silica nanoprobe as a
biomarker for rapid detection of plant pathogens. Adv Mater Res 79-82:513–516
Young M, Willits D, Uchida M, Douglas T (2008) Plant viruses as biotemplates for materials and
their use in nanotechnology. Annu Rev Phytopathol 46:361–384
Zhang X, Xiaoyong Z, Bin Y, Junfeng H, Meiying L, Zhenguo C et al (2014) Facile preparation
and cell imaging applications of fluorescent organic nanoparticles that combine AIE dye and
ring-opening polymerization. Polymer Chem 5:318–322
Zheng J, Birktoft JJ, Chen Y, Wang T, Sha R, Constantinou PE, Seeman NC (2009) From molec-
ular to macroscopic via the rational design of a self-assembled 3D DNA crystal. Nature
461(7260):74–77
Nano-enabled Agriculture Can Sustain
“Farm to Fork” Chain
Deepu Pandita
1 Introduction
Agriculture is facing many challenges like climate change, urbanization, lack of

new arable soil, reduction of the current agricultural land due to competing eco-
nomic development activities, sustainable use of natural resources, malnutrition,
and environmental issues like runoff and accumulation of pesticides and fertilizers.
This dilemma is further intensified by an alarming increase in food demand, needed
to feed an estimated population of 9.7 billion by 2050 (Pirzadah et al. 2019) so the
overall agricultural production ought to increase by sustainable means by 60% com-
pared to levels of 2005 (Alexandratos and Bruinsma 2012). Food and Agricultural
Organization of the United Nations (FAO) states that if world population reaches
9.1 billion by 2050, then food production needs to augment by 70% universally and
to double in the developing countries. The above-mentioned scenario of rapidly
developing and sophisticated agriculture system is the greatest challenge that will
be posed to the developing countries. Agriculture is regarded as the backbone of the
national economy of the developing countries of the world as about 2/5th of their
population depends on agriculture for livelihood (Brock et al. 2011). Profound
structural changes within the agricultural sector have occurred due to the fast devel-
opment within the technological innovations; however, these additionally pose chal-
lenges like sustainable production considering food security, ending hunger,
improving nutrition, and promoting sustainable agriculture. Achieving food secu-
rity will require a range of social and economic actions like reducing food waste,
improving the efficiency of irrigation systems, supporting local rural communities,
and tackling land degradation. Undoubtedly, scientific and technological innovation
will also play an important role through increasing agricultural productivity.
Nanotechnology, a novel emerging and fascinating scientific approach permits
D. Pandita (*)
Government Department of School Education, Jammu, Jammu and Kashmir, India

36 D. Pandita
advanced research in the field of biotechnology and agriculture that makes use of
the manipulation of materials for their novel, physical as well as chemical properties
at nanoscale. The application of nanotechnology to agriculture is getting attention
nowadays (Shapira and Youtie 2015; Resham et al. 2015; Nath 2015; Prasad et al.
2014, 2017; Sekhon 2014; Jampílek and Kráľová 2015; Pirzadah et al. 2019).
Nanotechnology could revolutionize the field of agriculture (Dimkpa and Bindraban
2016; Manjunatha et al. 2016) and the entire nanotechnology industry in 2015 was
worth US$1 trillion (Harper 2015). The field of agri-nanotechnology is in its infancy,
but it has the power to change the whole agriculture and food sector in coming
years. Nanosciences and nanotechnology have been introduced into agricultural
system during the last decade, with the primary goal of increasing the crop yield and
improving food quality. This novel scientific approach has the potential to advance
and enhance the agricultural productivity of the crop plants by the use of NPs
through efficient nanofertilizers, nanopesticides, nanoherbicides (Tarafdar et al.
2013), nanosensors, nanotracers (Dimkpa et al. 2017) and disease management,
nanoporous zeolites for slow release and efficient dosage of water and fertilizer,
nanocapsules for chemical herbicide delivery, vector and pest control, and nanosen-
sors for early and rapid disease and pest detection (Scrinis and Lyons 2007) coating
with genetic and organic or inorganic nanomaterials (Fernández-Luqueño et al.
2016), genetic improvement of plants, delivery of genes and drug molecules to spe-
cific sites at cellular levels, by using nanosensors and controlled and smart delivery
systems for agrochemicals like fertilizers and pesticides (Chinnamuthu and
Boopathi 2009), detection of the presence of any kind of bacteria and pathogens
rapidly and accurately to keep the food fresh for long time can also be achieved by
small particulate nanotechnology (Fig. 1). Above 90% of Indian soils have low N
and P content, while 50% of soil samples are low in K, zinc (49%), boron (33%),
molybdenum (13%), iron (12%), manganese (5%), and copper (3%) (Singh et al.
2008) and these deficiencies cause stagnation in crop productivity. Chemical fertil-
izers improve crop productivity by 50% (Samra and Sharma 2009). But the nutrient
use efficiency by crops is very low due to nutrient loss through fixation, leaching,
volatilization, and microbial mineralization with losses averaging 10–75% present-
ing a prime target for improvement. Also the cost of production inputs like chemical
fertilizers and pesticides is expected to increase at an alarming rate due to limited
reserves of fuel like natural gas and petroleum (Prasad et al. 2012). Hence, it is
necessary to minimize nutrient losses in fertilization, and to increase the crop yield
through the exploitation of new applications with the help of nanotechnology and
nanomaterials. Kah et al. (2018) reported that the median gain in efficiency with
nanofertilizers was approximately 20–30%. Nanoparticles (NPs) can be utilized for
delivery of pesticides, fertilizers, and other agrochemicals by the production of
nanocapsules being highly stable and biodegradable (Jha et al. 2009). Nanofertilizers
or nano-encapsulated nutrients might have properties that are effective to crops,
release the nutrients on-demand, controlled release of chemicals fertilizers that reg-
ulate plant growth and enhanced target activity (De Rosa et al. 2010; Nair et al.
2010). Nanotechnology proponents (IFRI 2008) and academics keen to promote the
Millennium Development Goals have suggested that agri-nanotechnology will
Nano-enabled Agriculture Can Sustain “Farm to Fork” Chain 37
Monitor Plant growth Germination Index
Vegetative
and Disease
traits
Shoot/root biomass
Application of Engineered Nanoparticles on Plant and Crops
Nanosensors and
Nanotracers Root elongation
Monitor Soil
quality
Improved number,
Reproductive
Irrigation size and biomass
Management
Traits
Agronomic Traits of flowers and fruits
Seed setting Rate

Fertilizer Delivery
Enhanced protein,
Qualitative Traits Carbohydrate and
Crop Improvement lipid content
Improved Pigment
Nanoparticles altered gene expression
content
Phytomedicine
Physiological Traits
Photosynthetic
enhancement
Machinery
Improved
Enhanced RuBisCO Increased Productivity
Activity
Enhanced Anticancer
Secondary Metabolite and antidiabetic
enhancement contents Stomatal
Conductance
Increased concentration
Efficient reduction of of artimisinin, hypericin,
agrochemicals usage hyperforin, aloin etc.
Plant Disease Effective control of

management plant pathogens
Fig. 1 Applications of engineered nanoparticles in the agriculture sector. Source: Misra P, Shukla
PK, Pramanik K, Gautam S, Kole C (2016) Nanotechnology for Crop Improvement. In: Kole
C, Kumar D, Khodakovskaya M. (eds) Plant Nanotechnology. Springer, Cham
deliver environmental sustainability and eradicate hunger (Salamanca-Buentello

et al. 2005). The vision of many proponents of agricultural nanotechnologies is one
of precise production, i.e., more uniform, more efficient, less labor intensive, more
remotely managed atomically “improved” crops whose high productivity is made
possible by entwined nano-surveillance and “smart” farm management systems,
nano-modified seeds, and specialist interactive chemical treatments (USDA 2003).
Nanotechnology permits disease prevention and treatment in plants using various
nanocides (Carmen et al. 2003) and nutrient management of agriculture using
nanofertilizers (Priester et al. 2012). According to the data of FAO, every year the
damage done to crops by pests and diseases constitutes 20% of the potential world
yield of food crops (FAO 2009). Among the total crop losses caused by different
sources, 14.1% are lost due to plant diseases alone and the total annual worldwide
crop loss from plant diseases is about US$220 billion. Commercial agriculture
relies heavily upon inputs of pesticides and fungicides to protect crops against pests
and pathogens (Agrios 2005) and their continuous and unchecked use has caused
resistance in them (Patel et al. 2014) and environmental pollution. New physiologi-
cal races and isolates of the existing pathogens will make them more virulent and
destructive and many dreadful diseases will emerge fast due to climate change.
Natural defense response of plants against pathogenesis depends upon early recog-
38 D. Pandita
nition of pathogens. Nanotechnology provides efficient tools for early detection of

plant diseases by diagnostic tools in managing insects and pathogens by targeted
controlled delivery of agri-based chemicals (Sharon et al. 2010; Sharma et al. 2012).
NPs can be exploited directly or modified for pathogen detection or as a diagnostic
tool to detect compounds indicating disease (Ghormade et al. 2011). The potential
application of nanomaterials in crop protection helps in development of efficient
and potential approaches for the management of plant pathogens (Gopal et al.
2011). Nanoparticles remain bound to the cell wall of pathogens and cause defor-
mity due to high-energy transfer leading to its death. The discovery of nanosensors
has led to a more precise and rapid disease diagnosis and pathogen detection (Khan
and Rizvi 2014). Nanosensors can further play role in measuring crop nutrient sta-
tus, moisture level, soil fertility, etc., which in turn helps in monitoring crop growth
(Scott and Chen 2003). Use of nanodiagnostic methods (nanofluidics, nanomateri-
als, and bioanalytical nanosensors) in plant breeding (Abd-Elsalam 2015) or
nanoparticle-mediated gene transfer to improve crop varieties for disease resistance
(Rai et al. 2012) can minimize the expenditure on agrochemicals used in disease
management. The use of NPs in plant pathology opens new avenues for plant pro-
tection, pathogen detection, and studying plant–pathogen interaction for effective
plant disease management (Ismail et al. 2017). Nanotechnological application in
plant pathology targets specific agricultural problems in host–pathogen interactions
and could provide new avenues for crop protection. Studies focused on the use of
nanoparticles for targeted delivery of pesticides and fertilizers demonstrated good
potential in disease suppression and crop yield enhancement (Servin et al. 2015).
The number of successful studies is still very limited, but nanosensors can be devel-
oped in the very near future. A great example is the recent building of single-walled
carbon nanotubes (SWCNTs) radiometric sensors (for H2O2 and NO) performed by
Giraldo et al. (2015) which proved the efficiency of radiometric nanosensing plat-
form for detecting key compounds in plant tissues. Nanotechnology has massive
potential to provide a chance for the researchers of plant science and alternative
fields, to develop new tools for incorporation of nanoparticles into plants that would
augment existing functions and add new ones (Cossins 2014). According to
Galbraith (2007) and Torney et al. (2007) engineered nanoparticles are able to enter
into plants cells and leaves, and also can transport DNA and chemicals into plant
cells. This area of research analysis offers new prospects in plant biotechnology to
target specific genes for manipulation and expression within specific plant cells. So
far, the nanotechnology is at its nascent stage and many success stories have been
documented especially from the crop production point of view. This chapter is
focused on reporting the latest advancements in the field of agricultural production
through nanotechnology-based agrochemicals, plant disease suppression via plant
defense mechanism, crop protection, pest control, more efficient use of resources,
enhanced food safety through sensors for the detection of pathogens or freshness,
engineered water nanostructures to treat food, therapeutic nanoparticles deliver
nutrients to agricultural crops against various deficiencies, plant stress tolerance in
genetically modified organism (GMO) by genetic material delivery via nanoparticle-
mediated chloroplast transgene delivery and overall impact on environmental and

its future perspectives in sustainable agriculture.
2 Disease Management Through Nanotechnology
Nano-phytopathology deals with specific problems in plant protection, pathogen

detection, deciphers plant–pathogen interactions, and offers new ways for disease
management of plants (Mahendra et al. 2012). The nanoparticles like nanosilica can
be used for the preparation of new formulations of pesticides, insecticides, and
insect repellants (Gajbhiye et al. 2009). The poly-ethylene glycol-coated NPs
loaded with garlic essential oil has been tested against Tribolium castaneum pest
(Yang et al. 2009). Porous hollow silica nanoparticles (PHSNs) loaded with vali-
damycin (pesticide) have been successfully employed as an efficient and controlled
release formulation for water soluble pesticides (Liu et al. 2006). The insecticidal
properties of nanosilica, silver, aluminum oxide, zinc oxide, and titanium dioxide
NPs have been successfully utilized in the management of rice weevil and grasserie
disease in silkworm (Goswami et al. 2010). Nanosilver (100 ppm) has been effec-
tively used as an antifungal agent on potato dextrose agar (PDA) (Kim et al. 2012a).
Teodoro et al. (2010) reported the insecticidal activity of nanoalumina against
S. oryzae and Rhyzopertha dominica of stored food supplies. Zinc oxide (ZnO) and
magnesium oxide (MgO) nanoparticles are verified effective as antibacterial and
anti-odor agents (Shah and Towkeer 2010) and antimicrobial preservative for food
products (Aruoja et al. 2009; Huang et al. 2005; Sharma et al. 2009). In nanoencap-
sulation of insecticides and herbicides, the nanochemicals using nanocarriers are
released into the target plant body in a controlled way for improving their efficiency
(Scrinis and Lyons 2007; Torney 2009). Silver NPs have strong antifungal potential
against Botrytis cinerea (Oh et al. 2006), Phoma glomerata, Phoma herbarium, and
Fusarium semitectum (Gajbhiye et al. 2009), Aspergillus niger, Bipolaris sorokini-
ana, and Magnaporthe grisea (Jo et al. 2009), Fusarium culmorum (Kasprowicz
et al. 2010), Fusarium oxysporum (Musarrat et al. 2010), Colletotrichum gloeospo-
rioides (Aguilar-Méndez et al. 2011), Aspergillus niger, Aureobasidium pullulans,
and Penicillium phoeniceum (Khaydarov et al. 2011). Syngenta’s Banner MAXX™
and “Nano-5” are two commercialized nanoformulation marketed products against
plant pathogens and diseases (Gopal et al. 2011). Fluorescent silica nanoprobes
have potential for speedy diagnosis of plant diseases. These nanoprobes conjugated
with the secondary protein antibody of goat anti-rabbit IgG were used for the detec-
tion of plant pathogen, Xanthomonas axonopodis pv. vesicatoria in Solanaceous
crops (Yao et al. 2009). NPs can act as biomarkers for quick detection of bacteria
(Boonham et al. 2008), fungi (Chartuprayoon et al. 2010), and plant viruses (Yao
et al. 2009) in plants. Nanochips containing fluorescent oligo capture probes are
microarrays used for disease detection (Lopez et al. 2009). Nanochips are extremely
specific and have high sensitivity to detect single nucleotide change in bacterial
microorganisms and viruses. Yao et al. (2009) used a NP with fluorescence silica
40 D. Pandita
and antibodies to detect pathogen-causing bacterial spot disease caused by

Xanthomonas axonopodis pv. vesicatoria. Singh et al. (2010) used nanogold-based
immune sensors using surface plasmon resonance (SPR) for detecting the pathogen
Tilletia indica causing Karnal bunt disease in wheat (Triticum aestivum). Nugaeva
et al. (2005) devised the micromechanical cantilever arrays for detecting fungal
spores of Aspergillus niger and Saccharomyces cerevisiae.
2.1 Nanobarcodes
In our daily life, identification tags have been applied in wholesale agriculture and
livestock products. Due to small size, NPs have been applied in many fields ranging
from advanced biotechnology to agricultural encoding. Nanobarcodes have been
used as ID tags for multiplexed analysis of gene expression and intracellular histo-
pathology (Branton et al. 2008). It has been proved economically proficient, rapid,
and effortless technique in decoding and recognition of diseases as multiple patho-
gens in a farm could be tagged and detected at any time by fluorescent-based tools
through this scientific technique (Li et al. 2005). The nanobarcodes serve as uniquely
identifiable nanoscale tags and have also been applied for authentication or tracking
in agricultural food and husbandry products (Han et al. 2001).
2.2 Nanosensors
Nanotechnology-enabled field sensing nanosensors help in real-time monitoring of

the crop growth and field conditions like soil conditions (pH, moisture level, fertil-
ity), temperature, crop nutrients (Mousavi and Rezaei 2011), detection of phyto-
pathogens and weeds (Prasad et al. 2017). With this vital information and signals,
the best scenario for the planting and harvesting of crops along with the time, the
level of water, agricultural fertilizers, pesticides, herbicides, nutritional status, defi-
ciency of the plants and other treatments required for specific plant physiological,
pathological and environmental conditions will facilitate to take up fitting and
timely remedial measures to decrease the yield loss. Nanosensors have not solely
been used as nanobiosensors however additionally for the control management of
soil nutrients and these have helped in the decline of fertilizer consumption and
environmental pollution (Ingale and Chaudhari 2013). Nanobiosensors have been
developed to detect contaminants, such as crystal violet or malachite green concen-
trations in seafood and parathion residues or residues of organophosphorus pesti-
cides on vegetables (Amine et al. 2006). Nanosensors can be employed as an
identification tool for detecting bacterial, fungal, and viral pathogens in agriculture
(Boonham et al. 2008; Prasad et al. 2014). Wang et al. (2016) have developed a
nanosensor for monitoring the levels of by-products salicylic acid in oil seeds for
detection of a pathogenic fungus Sclerotinia sclerotiorum, while CuO nanoparticles
and nanostructural layer biosensors are used for detecting Aspergillus niger (Etefagh
et al. 2013). The demand for onsite and real-time and sensor-based pathogen detec-
tion is expanding due to dynamic changes in plant-pathogen types. Methods based
on direct-charge transfer conductometric biosensor (Pal et al. 2008), CNTs (Serag
et al. 2013), and silver and gold NPs (Sadowski 2010) have been developed to detect
DNA or protein-functionalized gold NPs to be used as target-specific probes. A CO2
sensor was developed using polyaniline boronic acid conducting polymer for detect-
ing real-time spoilage of stored grain (Neethirajan et al. 2010). The conjunction of
NPs with enzymes has enhanced the sensitivity and stability of biosensors. Several
NP-based enzymatic biosensors like nanofibers, nanocomposite, graphene, and
nanotubes are available for detecting organophosphorus and non-organophosphorus
pesticides (Zhang et al. 2015). Acetolactate synthase-inhibitor herbicides metsulfu-
ron-methyl and imazaquin were detected by atomic force microscope tip functional-
ized with acetolactate synthase (da Silva et al. 2014). Another nanobiosensor type
was made by entrapping acetylcholinesterase in the liposome setup which success-
fully detected organophosphorus pesticides paraoxon and dichlorvos (Vamvakaki
and Chaniotakis 2007). Nanobiosensor based multi-walled carbon nanotubes
(MWCNT)-immobilized acetylcholinesterase was introduced for pesticide detec-
tion (Du et al. 2007). The same setup was used to detect aflatoxin through MWCNT-
immobilized aflatoxin oxidase (Li et al. 2017). Such ultrasensitive enzymatic
nanobiosensors have a pesticide detection limit of 50 pg/liter (Verma 2017). DNA-
based nanosensors can prove an important rapid solution for detection of plant dis-
eases (Fang and Ramasamy 2015). By using smart nanosensors, the precise amount
of plant-specific fertilizers and insecticides can be delivered. Designing diagnostic
nanosensors that can be integrated with pesticide delivery system for automatically
combating insect attack, fungal infection, or drought could revolutionize the agri-
culture field. Porous hollow silica NPs (PHSNs) complemented with a pesticide
have been tested with success in agriculture for prolonged controlled delivery of a
chemical agent (Liu et al. 2006). The graphene oxide biosensing enhances detection
of aflatoxins in food materials (Zhang et al. 2016). Nanobased biosensors are avail-
able against Cowpea mosaic virus, Tobacco mosaic virus, and Lettuce mosaic virus
(Lin et al. 2014).
3 nhanced Food Safety Through Sensors for the Detection

E
of Pathogens or Freshness
The global market value for food and food packaging products in 2006 which were
developed through the use of nanotechnology was estimated by two market reports
at US$4 million and US$7 billion, and predicted for growth to US$6 billion by 2012
and >US$20 billion by 2010 (www.cientifica.com, www.hkc22.com). The economic
value of nanotechnology in the agri-food market in 2010 was expected to be US$20.4
billion (Farhang 2009), in form of product development (e.g., nano-delivery, nano-
42 D. Pandita
formulation, and packaging), food processing (e.g., nanocapsules, nano-powders,

nano-ingredients), and food safety (e.g., nanosensors and nanotracers) (Chaudhry
et al. 2008). Through nanomaterials, packaging materials with better mechanical
strength, conductivity, and functionality will be produced (Brody et al. 2008;
Azeredo et al. 2009). Nanotechnology can revolutionize the food sector to ensure
security and safety using nanosensors to detect pathogens and food packaging sys-
tems by encapsulation of food products using nano-compounds (Prasad et al. 2014,
2017). Smart packaging (food packaging with antimicrobial or oxygen scavenging
properties) embedded with nanosensors alerts consumers on the state of the food
inside (e.g., freshness, storage temperature, microbial contamination) or when an
eatable is no longer safe to eat. Sensors give warning signals prior to food spoilage
or infer even the accurate nutritional status of the contents. Packaging equipped with
nanosensors is additionally designed to trace either the interior or external condi-
tions of foodstuffs, pellets, and containers, throughout the supply chain. Nanosensors
can detect gases produced by food when it spoils and the packaging itself changes
color to alert you. The nanosensors are able to respond to environmental changes
(e.g., temperature or humidity in storage rooms, levels of oxygen exposure), degra-
dation products, or microbial contamination (Bouwmeester et al. 2009). Usually,
producers estimate the expiration date of food by considering distribution and stor-
age conditions, especially temperature to which the food product is supposed to be
exposed. However, such conditions are not always known, and foods are frequently
exposed to temperature abuse; this is particularly worrying for products which
require a cold chain. Furthermore, sealing defects in packaging systems can lead
food products to an unexpected high exposure to oxygen, which can result in unde-
sirable changes. Nanosensors, when integrated into food packaging, can detect cer-
tain chemical compounds, pathogens, and toxins in food, being then useful to
eliminate the need for inaccurate expiration dates, providing real-time status of food
freshness (Liao et al. 2005). Nanobiosensors have been developed and commercial-
ized to detect pathogens, spoilage, chemical contaminants, or product tampering, or
to track ingredients or products through the processing chain (Nachay 2007).
Nanosensors based on carbon nanotubes have been noticed to possess many benefits
over conventional/traditional detection methods like high performance liquid chro-
matography. Carbon nanotube based nanosensor is rapid and allows simple and cost
effective high-throughput detection at reduced power requirements and easier recy-
cling along with un-necessity of exogenous molecules or labels. Furthermore, a
MWCNT-based biosensor has also been developed that can detect microorganisms,
toxic proteins, and degraded products in food and beverages (Nachay 2007). The
spherical selenium nanoparticles from Bacillus subtilis were used for building HRP
(horse radish peroxidase) biosensor (Wang et al. 2010), while yeast cells were used
for biosynthesis of Au-Ag alloy nanoparticles to make a sensitive electrochemical
vanillin sensor (Zheng et al. 2010) and AuNP-based glucose oxidase (GOx) biosen-
sors were synthesized for enhanced GOx enzyme activity (Zheng et al. 2010).
Engineered nanosensors have conjointly been developed in packages to alter color
to warn the buyer if a food is starting to spoil, or has been contaminated by patho-
gens using electronic “noses” and “tongues” to “taste” or “smell” scents and flavors
(Scrinis and Lyons 2007; Sozer and Kokini 2009). In real market applications,
Nestlé, British Airways, Monoprix Supermarkets are utilizing chemical nanosensors
that can detect color modification (Pehanich 2006).
3.1 Freshness and Spoilage Indicators
On-package indicator with polyaniline film, showing color change by a variety of

basic volatile amines liberated during fish spoilage has been developed (Kuswandi
et al. 2012). In this way the real-time fish spoilage monitoring either at various con-
stant temperatures or with temperature fluctuations is done. Microorganisms cause
food spoilage and their metabolism produces gases detectable by conducting poly-
mer nanocomposites or metal oxides, through which quantification and/or identifi-
cation of microorganisms as well as food freshness can be performed. The resistance
changes of the sensors generate a pattern that matches to the gas under analysis
(Kuswandi et al. 2012). The conducting polymer nanocomposite sensors having
carbon black and polyaniline are designed for identification and detection of food
borne pathogens by producing a specific response pattern for every microorganism,
for example; Bacillus cereus, Vibrio parahemolyticus, and Salmonella spp. (Arshak
et al. 2007). An “electronic tongue” in food packaging has also been developed
(Joseph and Morrison 2006). Nanotechnology has the potential to change both the
physical and functional properties of the food we consume. It is now possible that
food scientists can develop “smart” foods which can respond to body’s nutrient
deficiencies and distribute nutrients more efficiently without changing the taste or
texture of the product. Some of the nanosciences advanced products available in the
market (The project on emerging nanotechnologies 2009) are as follows:
1. Tip Top UP® Omega-3 DHA is fortified with nanocapsules containing Omega-3
DHA rich tuna fish oil.
2. Canola Activa oil is fortified with nonesterified phytosterols encapsulated via a
new nanoencapsulation technology (NSSL: Nanosized Self-assembled Liquid
structures), developed by Nutralease (Israel) for optimizing the absorption and
bioavailability of target nutrients.
3. Nanoceuticals™ Slim Shake Chocolate is nanoscale ingredient that scavenges
more free radicals, increases hydration, balances the body’s pH, reduces lactic
acid during exercise, reduces the surface tension of foods and supplements to
increase wetness and absorption of nutrients.
4. Nanotea is nano-fine powder produced using nanotechnologies.
5. NovaSOL Sustain is nanocarrier that introduces CoQ1O to address fat reduction
and alpha-lipoic acid for satiety.
44 D. Pandita
4 Nanotechnology in Enhancing Soil Security
Soil security aims at the long-term sustainable production of sufficient food quan-
tity (Bouma et al. 2015). The security conception is more difficult once applied to
soils. Rather than relate to a sustainable, daily need in terms of food intake, soil
security relates to what might happen if soils degrade to the extent that sufficient
food production is not feasible anymore. Soil degradation may be a long run process,
very much related to varying socio-economic conditions. Except for erosion, its
effects are often gradual and difficult to communicate and translate into environ-
mental and economic values. However, once soils degrade to the extent that they
cannot any longer offer certain ecosystem services, of which food production is
only one provisioning service, the consequences for society are devastating. To
mitigate degraded soils is very difficult and even impossible when soil has been
removed by erosion. The challenge, therefore, is to create early awareness about the
dangers of soil degradation that may, in the end, terminate many ecosystem services
the soil can provide (Bouma et al. 2015). Nanomaterials (NMs) can work out soil
restoration problems. These play an imperative part as clay minerals which control
both the physical and chemical properties of the soil and governing cation exchange
capacity (CEC) of the soil which in turn enhances fertility and productivity (De
Boodt et al. 2013). Engineered nanomaterials (ENMs) improve plant growth, boost
soil water and nutrient holding capacity of soil, enhance the amount of biosolids to
agricultural fields, and clean up and restore soil after accidental spills (Gardea-
Torresdey et al. 2014). Besides the soil security, the food security was and will
remain a major global issue of the twenty-first century. Furthermore, principal
determinants of food security include the availability and quality of soil resources,
and their interactions with water resources as well as vegetation (crop species)
through energy-based inputs using social control skills for optimizing the net pri-
mary productivity (Lal 2015). This net primary productivity is specifically affected
by critical linkages that govern some specific functions of nexuses. These nexuses
embody the primary one, soil and water for the plant, available water capacity by
influencing water retention and transmission, conversion of blue and gray into green
water, and elevate the consequences of pedologic and agronomic droughts (Lal
2015). The second one includes the soil and vegetation for biogeochemical cycling,
which determines elemental budgets, nutrient use efficiency, root distribution and
turnover, and soil/root respiration. The third is vegetation and energy for energy/
mass transformation and influencing energy productivity, ecosystem carbon budget,
and biomass feed stocks for biofuel production. Finally, the fourth one is energy and
water affecting the hydrological cycle with specific impacts on water and energy
balance on a landscape, energy use in irrigated systems, and moderation of the
hydrological/meteorological droughts. These nexuses have an effect on and are
influenced by climate changes and variability on the one hand and anthropogenic/
manmade perturbations on the opposite (Lal 2015). Lal (2015) reported about the
importance of nexuses and their inter-connectivity. There is a close relationship
between soil security, water security, climate security, energy security, economic
security, and political security (Lal 2015). Concerning the food security, it includes
availability, access, nutritional quality, and retention, which strongly depends on
soil security (quality, resilience), water security (quality, renewability, availability),
energy security (dependability, supply, price), climate security (optimal temperature
and moisture regimes, and low frequency of extreme events), economic security
(income and access to resources), and political stability (peace and harmony).
Therefore, the co-productivity generated by the anthropogenic use of primary
resources (soil, water, climate) and secondary inputs (amendments, fertilizers,
irrigation, tillage) should be optimized. Understanding and judiciously managing
the water-soil-waste nexus for food security is important to enhancing human well-
being, achieving the sustainable use of natural resources, improving the environ-
ment, and sustaining ecosystem functions and services (Lal 2015). The zero-valent
iron NPs have high absorption affinity toward heavy metals and organic compounds
because of which these help in remediation of pesticide-infested soil. Fe NPs pos-
sess great soil-binding qualities like CaCO3. The nanosized sulfonated polyaniline
(nSPANI) NM delays soil surface crust formation and has no impact on crop germi-
nation (Mohammadi and Khalafi-Nezhad 2012). Nanoclays stabilize sandy soil
with soil application as grown media additive in small-scale cultivation (Boroghani
et al. 2011) and cause thymol encapsulation with insecticide and bactericide activity
(Guarda et al. 2011). Chitosan NPs lead to carvacrol encapsulation wherein bioac-
tive compound found in thyme has bactericidal activity (Higueras et al. 2013). Zein
NPs cause eugenol and curcumin encapsulation which have insecticide, nematicide,
and bactericide activity (Zhang et al. 2014).
5 Important Nanoparticles in the Agro-Industry
5.1 Chitosan Nanoparticles (CNP)
It has been reported in the plant system that chitosan has the ability to induce mul-
tifaceted disease resistance (El-Hadrami et al. 2010) and antimicrobial activity
(Prasad et al. 2017). Chitosan is an effective biotic elicitor that induces the systemic
resistance in plants. CNP have antifungal properties in response to different plant
pathogens (Saharan et al. 2013). The induction of natural defense mechanism
involves overexpression of different defensive genes and enzymes, amplified depo-
sition of phenolic compounds, cell wall synthesis, etc. Plants treated with different
biological elicitor molecules have shown to provoke such innate immune response
by mimicking variety of pathogens (McCann et al. 2012). As an exogenous elicitor,
chitosan can stimulate resistance in plant host by increasing some defense-related
enzyme activities, such as phenylalanine ammonia-lyase (PAL), peroxidase (POD),
catalase (CAT), superoxide dismutase (SOD), and polyphenol oxidase (PPO) activi-
ties (Xing et al. 2015). Six plant defense responses to chitosan nanostructures
including: reactive oxygen species (ROS), hypersensitive response (HR),
46 D. Pandita
pathogenesis-related proteins (PRP), defense-related enzymes (DRE), secondary

metabolites accumulation (SMA), and complex signal transduction (CSR). Recently,
Chandra et al. (2015) have reported that accumulation of CNP increases the plant
defense by increasing the levels of SOD and CAT. CNP binds extracellular around
the cell wall of the leaves. One of the most important signaling molecules is nitro-
gen oxide (NO), which is also coupled with many physiological processes involving
initiation of defense system in plants. Plants treated with CNP showed increased
levels of NO, as compared to control plants (Malerba et al. 2012). CNP-treated sets
resulted in upregulation of PAL activity leading to the higher level of phenolic com-
pound accumulation. Higher accumulation of flavonoids like gallic acid (GA), epi-
catechin (EC), epigallocatechin (EGC), and caffeine was seen when sets were
treated with CNP. These accumulated phytochemicals assist in adaptation to various
environmental circumstances and provide resistance against pathogen by perform-
ing as feeding deterrents. In CNP-treated plants higher expression of SOD and CAT
was observed resulting in increased level of these enzymes.
5.2 TiO2 Nanoparticles
TiO2 increases the enzyme activities which decreases the accumulation of ROS. TiO2
nanoparticle treatment defends chloroplasts aging for extended-time illumination
by increasing the defense properties of POD, SOD, and CAT. Decrease deposition
of ROS and the level of malondialdehyde (MDA) maintain steadiness of membrane
structure of chloroplast treated with luminance (Hong et al. 2005). In Phaseolus
vulgaris, nano-TiO2 enhanced activities of SOD, CAT, POD, MDA, and 8-deoxy-2-
hydroxyguanosine (8-OHDG) content (Ebrahimi et al. 2016).
5.3 ulti-Walled Carbon Nanotubes (MWCNTs)

M
Nanoparticles
Tan et al. (2009) showed that when rice seedlings were exposed with MWCNTs, the
ROS levels significantly increased and the cell viability decreased. This is because
these nanotubes make contact with the cell walls and undergo ROS defense response
cascade, which is ample to avoid microbial pathogens from finishing their life cycle
(Smirnova et al. 2011). Moreover, Lin and Xing (2007) also observed apoptosis in
cells of lettuce exposed to multiwall carbon nanotube. Multiwalled carbon nano-
tubes (MWCNTs) when coated with metallic nanomaterials like Ag NPs or Zn NPs
control the growth of the phytopathogens, Aspergillus fumigatus, and A. ochraceus
(Fosso-Kankeu et al. 2016).
5.4 Silicon Nanoparticles
Silicon nanoparticles are known to enhance the fungal resistance in maize by

expressing higher level of phenolic compound and lower level of stress-responsive
enzymes against fungi. A combination of Pseudomonas fluorescens and silica NPs
in soil increases phenolic action and trims down the stress by the inhibition of
responsive enzymes in maize. This elevated level of phenolics is established to
induce silica accumulation in leaf epidermal layer, thereby conferring a defensive
physical wall as well as induced disease resistance (Rangaraj et al. 2014).
Suriyaprabha et al. (2014) reported the nanosilica acts as a potent antifungal agent
against maize pathogens such as Fusarium oxysporum and Aspergillus niger and
leads to higher expression level of phenolic compounds and lower expression level
of stress-responsive enzymes. Tripathi et al. (2017) reported that silicon nanoparti-
cles alleviate UV-B stress in wheat seedlings and detoxify arsenic and chromium
stress in wheat and Pisum sativum seedlings, respectively (Tripathi et al. 2016).
5.5 Zinc Oxide Nanoparticles
Nano-Zn increased GSH levels and CAT activity in buckwheat leaves (Lee et al.
2013). Kim et al. (2012b) noticed high activity for SOD, POD, and CAT when
treated by nano-ZnO in cucumber plants and higher SOD in Spirodela polyrhiza
(Hu et al. 2013). The ZnO NPs increased the action of antioxidant defense enzymes
and upregulated the production level of SOD and POX isoenzymes in Gossypium
hirsutum plants (Priyanka and Venkatachalam 2016).
6 Plant Induced Resistance Through Nanoparticles
NPs are discovered to induce oxidative stress and alter gene expression in plants
(Wang et al. 2013). ROS not only restrict pathogen entrance but also play an impor-
tant role in activating local and systemic defense systems such as the stimulation of
pathogenesis associated protein genes (Henry et al. 2013). The plant hormones sali-
cylic acid, jasmonic acid, and ethylene play significant roles in defense reactions as
signaling molecules (Robert-Seilaniantz et al. 2011). The speedy production of O2
or phenoxyl radicals in tomato roots treated with MgO NPs may play a related role
in the resistance response of tomatoes against Ralstonia solanacearum (Imada et al.
2016). Chitosan extensively elevates polyphenol oxidase activity in rice plantlets
followed by inoculation of two rice pathogens (Xanthomonas oryzae pv. oryzae and
X. oryzae pv. oryzicola) (Li et al. 2013). Silver and ZnO NP treatment lead to
increase in contents of free radicals, together with ROS, reactive nitrogen species,
and hydrogen peroxide in duckweed (Thwala et al. 2013). Cu-chitosan NPs showed
48 D. Pandita
significant fungicidal activity against Curvularia leaf spot (CLS) in maize and
induce the systemic acquired resistance as well as promote development of Zea
mays (Choudhary et al. 2017). Cu-chitosan NPs adhere to fungal hyphae and
obstruct the mycelial growth of R. solani and S. rolfsii and inhibit their sclerotia
formation (Rubina et al. 2017).
7 ngineered Water Nanostructures to Treat Food Surfaces

E
to Reduce Pathogen Presence
Food borne disease as a result of consuming microbiologically contaminated food

is a major public health problem, with the annual worldwide toll reaching an alarm-
ing 600 million cases and 420,000 deaths (WHO 2015). During 2004–2012 the
USA experienced 377 major food related outbreaks, wherein norovirus, Salmonella
spp., and E. coli being the biggest culprits (Callejón et al. 2015). By 2014 USDA
estimation, food borne illnesses cost the US$15.6 billion annually (USDA 2014).
The food industry is challenged to find solutions to a fast-changing food production
environment, dictated by new consumer preferences for “green” and organic foods,
including consumption of more fresh fruits and vegetables (Van Boxstael et al.
2013). Currently, there are a number of antimicrobial strategies used by the food
industry across the “farm to the fork” chain. These mainly include: chlorine-
elemental or hypochlorite; chlorine dioxide (Pao et al., 2007); peracetic acid (Fraisse
et al. 2011); hydrogen peroxide liquid or vapor (Rudnick et al. 2009); thermal
approaches and ozone-gaseous and aqueous (Horvitz and Cantalejo 2014); irradia-
tion (UV and gamma) (WHO 2008); electrolyzed water (Koseki et al. 2004). Some
of these methods (chlorine-elemental, hypochlorite, chlorine dioxide) leave behind
chemical residues are ineffective with a heavy organic load and are not approved for
use with organic products (Karaca and Velioglu 2007). Moreover, some of the afore-
mentioned methods can induce visible damage and negative sensory effects to prod-
ucts such as fresh produce (e.g., ozone) (Rico et al. 2007). Some interventions are
also associated with high energy costs and significant environmental footprints
(Ruder 2006). The food industry is, therefore, in need of novel, effective, green, and
low cost intervention methods, in line with the new sustainable environmental
approaches and emerging consumer preferences. Such methods should have the
capability to be applied with ease at various stages from “farm to fork,” and replace
or supplement existing technologies and enhance food safety and quality (Newell
et al. 2010). In the last two decades, nanotechnology has shown that it can enhance
our arsenal of methods in the battle against pathogenic and spoilage microorgan-
isms. Indeed, nanotechnology-based approaches, such as antimicrobial food sur-
faces, nano-enabled sensors, active/intelligent packaging, and novel disinfection
platforms, are finding their way within the agri/food/feed sector, bringing great new
opportunities to the food industry (Eleftheriadou et al. 2017). Recently, the authors
have developed a completely unique, dry, organic chemical free, nanotechnology-
based antimicrobial platform utilizing engineered water nanostructures (EWNS)

synthesized as an aerosol employing a combined electrospray and ionization
method. These EWNS have been shown to effectively inactivate a wide range of
food related microorganisms on food surfaces, on food contact surfaces, and in air
(Pyrgiotakis et al. 2015, 2016). These EWNS particles possess a unique set of
physico-chemical properties that make them an effective antimicrobial agent. They
have an average charge of 10–40 electrons per structure and an average nanoscale
size of 25 nm (Pyrgiotakis et al. 2016). Earlier studies have shown that they contain
a large number of reactive oxygen species (ROS), primarily hydroxyl (OH•) and
superoxide (O2−) radicals which are highly microbicidal (Pyrgiotakis et al. 2016).
Recently Vaze et al. (2018) synthesized e-Engineered water nanostructures
(eEWNS) utilizing integrating electrolysis, electrospray, and ionization of water,
which are effective, green, dry, and chemical-free approach, antimicrobial platform
for surface and air disinfection suitable for a variety of food safety applications and
could be ideal for delicate fresh produce that cannot withstand the classical, wet
disinfection treatments, where reactive oxygen species (ROS), generated and encap-
sulated within the particles during synthesis, were found to be the main inactivation
mechanism and the ROS content is three times higher. The increase of the ROS
content as a result of the addition of the electrolysis step before electrospray and
ionization led to an increased antimicrobial ability. The results showed a 97% inac-
tivation of the total natural microbiota viable count, a 99% reduction in the yeast
and mold count, and a 2.5 times reduction of the inoculated E.coli after 45 min of
exposure on the surface of fresh organic blackberries, without any visual changes to
the fruit.
8 herapeutic Nanoparticles Deliver Nutrients

T
to Agricultural Crops Against Various Deficiencies
Agricultural ingredients are applied to crop plants either by irrigation or directly to

their foliage. Foliar feeding circumvents problems associated with soil penetration
and biodegradation. The efficiency of foliar applications strongly depends on
absorption and mobility, where in many cases both requirements are deficient
(Eichert et al. 2008). Nanocarriers hold big promise for bridging this gap, owing to
their ability to carry complex payloads across biological barriers and target to spe-
cific tissues (Chhipa 2017). Liposomes, vesicles engineered nanoparticles with an
inner aqueous core surrounded by a lipid bilayer, are widely used as carriers of
medicinal small molecules, proteins, and nucleic acids (Abegglen et al. 2015).
Liposomes specifically −100 nm PEGylated liposomes are stable in aqueous envi-
ronments and subsequently fuse to the plasma membrane or internalized by cells
through endocytic and signaling pathways and reduce hypersensitive responses in
plants (Kabanov et al. 2015). Nanoparticles have proven to be effective carriers for
a wide range of compounds, capable of enhancing biological targeting, delivery, and
50 D. Pandita
uptake (Meir et al. 2014). The nanoscale drug-delivery systems with agricultural
nutrients (liposomes loaded with Mg or Fe), when sprayed to leaves of tomato
plants with acute nutrient deficiency of Mg and Fe deficiencies, penetrate the leaf
and translocate in a bi-directionally throughout the plant, taking advantage of the
plant’s natural transportation mechanisms and without exerting any toxicity.
Liposomal formulations restored both chlorosis and epinasty, and activated plant-
growth mechanisms. These research findings support developing the implementa-
tion of nanotechnology field for delivering micronutrients to agricultural crops for
increasing yield (Karny et al. 2018). Intracellular (in the nucleus or cytoplasm)
cargo release (dye from the liposomes) can be mediated by the disruption of the
nanoparticle by lipases, or due to dye leakage caused by osmotic destabilization
(Brodin et al. 2015). These results show that nanotechnology grants a new techno-
logical alternative for treating fully grown crops.
9 enetic Material Delivery via Nanoparticle-Mediated

G
Chloroplast Transgene Delivery
Zarei et al. (2018) reported that a great attention is recently given to the smart deliv-
ery systems of organic and inorganic agrochemical to deliver the nucleic acids into
the plant cells. The nanosized materials are a promising tool for delivery of genetic
material inside plant cells. Carbon nanomaterials can penetrate and enter into cells
and thus can be employed for the purpose of DNA molecule delivery (Burlaka et al.
2015). The technology of nucleic acid and chemicals delivery to plant cells using
mesoporous silica nanoparticle system (MSNPs) has become apparent (Galbraith
2007; Torney et al. 2007; Martin-Gullon et al. 2006; Martin-Ortigosa et al. 2014).
Liu et al. (2009) proved the possibility of delivery of DNA by carbon nanotubes
inside Nicotiana tabacum cell for the first time. Carbon nanotubes are the best
example showing safe interaction with biomacromolecules and a remarkable poten-
tial nano-vector to transfect plant cells with genes of interest (Wang et al. 2014).
The single-walled-CNTs (SWCNTs) act as nano-transporters for delivery of DNA
and dye molecules into plant cells (Srinivasan and Saraswathi 2010). Khodakovskaya
et al. (2012) reported MWCNTs induce cell division, proliferation, and activated
expression of several genes of cell division (CycB), cell wall extension (NtLRX1),
and water transport (NtPIP1) in tobacco callus after penetration. Martin-Ortigosa
et al. (2012) reported improvement of delivery of DNA inside Allium cepa epider-
mal tissue with use of gold nanorods (NRs). Created MSNPs were effective for
mediated co-delivery of protein and plasmid DNA into plant cells (Martin-Ortigosa
et al. 2012). According to Nima et al. (2014), AuNR/Ag nanoparticles are excellent
candidates for delivery of different molecules including nucleic acid into plant cells.
Another promising type of nanomaterials for nucleic acid delivery is polymer
nanoparticles. Thus, fluorescent conjugated polymer nanoparticles (CPNs) were
used to deliver siRNAs and knockdown specific gene target in tobacco BY-2 proto-
plasts (da Silva et al. 2014). MSNPs can edit genome and generate precisely modi-
fied “nontransgenic” plants. Using MSNPs as carrier, cre-recombinase protein when
delivered into Zea mays (Martin-Ortigosa et al. 2014) removed loxP-defined DNA
fragment from maize genome. Different reports suggested that the MWCNTs have
a more magic ability to influence the seed germination and plant growth and work
as a delivery system of DNA and chemicals to plant cells (Lahiani et al. 2015). On
the other hand, scientists indicated that both MWCNTs and SWCNTs were docu-
mented by using Raman spectroscopy and transmission electron microscopy (TEM)
(Lahiani et al. 2015). The single-stranded DNA molecules wrapped around
SWCNTs were able to target the cytoplasm of walled plant cells. So RNA pieces
can be sent into the nucleus to activate or silence the genes and plasmids into proto-
plast for delivery into the plant cell genome (Serag et al. 2015). Plant genetic engi-
neering can benefit from nanotechnology in the area of improvement of plant
transformation. Plant transformation efficiency can be increased with nanovehicles
by more precise delivery of genetic material, ability to control gene expression
through release of incorporated chemical inducer and better detection of nano-
delivered genetic material inside cell. Nanoparticle-mediated transformation signi-
fies a promising approach for plant genetic engineering because of being simple,
easy to perform, cost effective, applicable to adult plants across varied species, does
not require specialized, expensive devices and thus is widely applicable. Based on
the particle size and surface charge, SWCNTs can navigate the stiff plant cell walls,
cell membranes, and chloroplast membrane by lipid exchange envelope penetration
(LEEP), and finally get kinetically entrapped inside the chloroplasts (Giraldo et al.
2014; Wong et al. 2016; Lew et al. 2018). Recently Kwak et al. (2019) have demon-
strated the possibility of chloroplast transformation (chloroplast-targeted gene
delivery) using chitosan-complexed SWCNTs as nanocarriers designed using the
LEEP model to maximize the trafficking efficiency and protect and deliver pDNA–
SWNT 9pDNA encoding a YFP reporter gene) conjugates into the chloroplasts
transiently transgene expression in mature Eruca sativa, Nasturtium officinale,
Nicotiana tabacum, and Spinacia oleracea plants and in isolated Arabidopsis thali-
ana mesophyll protoplasts. This nanoparticle-mediated chloroplast transgene deliv-
ery tool provides practical advantages over current delivery techniques as a potential
transformation method for mature plants to benefit plant bioengineering and bio-
logical studies. Recently, Demirer et al. (2019) reported efficient diffusion-based
DNA delivery with nanomaterials and protein expression without transgene integra-
tion in Nicotiana benthamiana (Nb), Eruca sativa (arugula), Triticum aestivum
(wheat), and Gossypium hirsutum (cotton) leaves and arugula protoplasts.
10 Conclusion and Perspective
Global economy reported that the agribusiness market estimation was in the range
of US$ 20.7 billion to US$ 0.98 trillion in 2010 which was expected to go beyond
US$ 3.4 trillion by 2020 (Hooley et al. 2014). Under National Nanotechnology
52 D. Pandita
Initiative, USA invested US$ 3.7, while Japan and the European Union enhance
nanotechnology area with annual funding of US$750 million and US$ 1.2 billion,
respectively (Hirsh et al. 2014). The developing countries which face the stigma of
population explosion, also need to take up research in this area and apply nanobio-
technology based concepts for the sustainable agriculture. The agri-nanotechnology
may take many decades to maneuver from laboratory to land. To feed billions of
people, agricultural practices like plant breeding and IPM are not sufficient and
need smart alternatives that could match our current and future food demands.
Nanotechnology, a novel high-tech for agriculture is most promising and attractive
field which could potentially address global challenges in food and agriculture and
will ensure food security, development of environment friendly and sustainable
agriculture. By employing NPs we can reduce input on chemicals, minimize nutri-
ent loss and environmental footprints, and enhance crop yield. Nanotechnology as a
versatile platform is sufficient in alleviating problems of higher chemical input cost,
poor efficiency of pesticides, herbicides, fungicides and fertilizers and their con-
tamination in land and groundwater by providing cost-effective, reduced use of effi-
cient high-targeting delivery and smart controlled releasing nano-agrochemicals.
These nanochemicals release the nutrients during the demand-driven period in a
precise manner. Nanotechnology also enables the environmentally acceptable solu-
tions for reduced water pollution, food product residual contamination and the
nanosensors and barcodes enable efficient and healthy useage of agricultural
resources which increase the soil and environmental qualities. The mode of action
of NPs is possibly more complex, linking to a long way of actions, which need to
further investigate.
References
Abd-Elsalam KA (2015) Nanodiagnostic tools in plant breeding. J Nanotech Mater Sci 2(2):1–8
Abegglen LM, Caulin AF, Chan A, Lee K, Robinson R et al (2015) Potential mechanisms for
cancer resistance in elephants and comparative cellular response to DNA damage in humans.
JAMA 314:1850–1860
Agrios GN (2005) Plant pathology, 5th edn. Elsevier Academic Press, San Diego
Aguilar-Méndez MA, Martín-Martínez ES, Ortega-Arroyo L, Cobián-Portillo G, Sánchez-
Espíndola E (2011) Synthesis and characterization of silver nanoparticles: effect on phyto-
pathogen Colletotrichum gloeosporioides. J Nanopart Res 13:2525–2532
Alexandratos N, Bruinsma J (2012) World agriculture: towards 2015/2030: the 2012 revision
(Food and Agricultural Organization of the United Nations). http://www.fao.org/docrep/016/
ap106e/ap106e.pdf
Amine A, Mohammadi H, Bourais I, Palleschi G (2006) Enzyme inhibition-based biosensors for
food safety and environmental monitoring. Biosens Bioelectron 21(8):1405–1423
Arshak K, Adley C, Moore E, Cunniffe C, Campion M, Harris J (2007) Characterisation of poly-
mer nanocomposite sensors for quantification of bacterial cultures. Sens Actuators B Chem
126:226–231
Aruoja V, Dubourguier H, Kasamets C, Kahru KA (2009) Toxicity of nanoparticles of CuO, ZnO
and TiO2 to microalgae, Pseudokirchneriella subcapitata. Sci Total Environ 407:1461–1468
Azeredo HC, Mattoso LH, Wood DF, Williams TG, Avena-Bustillos RD, Mc Hugh TH (2009)
Nanocomposite edible films from mango puree reinforced with cellulose nanofibers. J Food
Sci 74(5):31–35
Boonham N, Glover R, Tomlinson J, Mumford R (2008) Exploiting generic platform technologies
for the detection and identification of plant pathogens. Eur J Plant Pathol 121:355–363
Boroghani M, Mirnia SK, Vahhabi J, Ahmadi SJ, Charkhi A (2011) Nanozeolite synthesis and
the effect on the runoff and erosion control under rainfall simulator. Aust J Basic Appl Sci
5(12):1156–1163
Bouma J, Batjes NH, Sonneveld MPW, Bindraban P (2015) Enhancing soil security for smallholder
agriculture. In: Lal R, Stewart BA (eds) Soil management of smallholder agriculture. Advances
in soil science series. CRC Press, Taylor & Francis Group, LLC, Boca Raton, pp 17–37
Bouwmeester H, Dekkers S, Noordam MY, Hagens WI, Bulder AS, de Heer C et al (2009) Review
of health safety aspects of nanotechnologies in food production. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol
53(1):52–62
Branton D, Deamer DW, Marziali A, Bayley H, Benner SA, Butler T, Di Ventra M, Garaj S, Hibbs
A, Huang X (2008) The potential and challenges of nanopore sequencing. Nat Biotechnol
26(10):1146–1153
Brock DA, Douglas TE, Queller DC, Strassmann JE (2011) Primitive agriculture in a social
amoeba. Nature 469:393–396
Brodin P, Jojic V, Gao T, Bhattacharya S, Angel CJL, Furman D, Shen-Orr S, Dekker CL, Swan
GE, Butte AJ, Maecker HT, Davis MM (2015) Variation in the human immune system is
largely driven by non-heritable influences. Cell 160:37–47
Brody AL, Bugusu B, Han JH, Sand CK, McHugh TH (2008) Scientific status summary. J Food
Sci 73:R107–R116
Burlaka OM, Pirko YV, Yemets AI, Blume YB (2015) Plant genetic transformation using carbon
nanotubes for DNA delivery. Cytol Genet 49:349–357
Callejón RM, Rodríguez-Naranjo MI, Ubeda C, Hornedo-Ortega R, Garcia-Parrilla MC, Troncoso
AM (2015) Reported foodborne outbreaks due to fresh produce in the United States and
European Union: trends and causes. Foodborne Pathog Dis 12(1):32–38. https://doi.org/10.
1089/fpd.2014.1821
Carmen IU, Chithra P, Huang Q, Takhistov P, Liu S, Kokini JL (2003) Nanotechnology: a new
frontier in food science. Food Technol 57:24–29
Chandra S, Chakraborty N, Dasgupta A, Sarkar J, Panda K, Acharya K (2015) Chitosan nanopar-
ticles: a positive modulator of innate immune responses in plants. Sci Rep 5:15195
Chartuprayoon N, Rheem Y, Chen W, Myung N (2010) Detection of plant pathogen using LPNE
grown single conducting polymer nanoribbon. In: Proceedings of the 218th electrochemical
society meeting, Las Vegas, Nevada, USA, pp 2278–2278, 10–15
Chaudhry Q, Scotter M, Blackburn J, Ross B, Boxall A, Castle L, Aitken R, Watkins R (2008)
Applications and implications of nanotechnologies for the food sector. Food Addit Contam
25(3):241–258
Chhipa H (2017) Nanofertilizers and nanopesticides for agriculture. Environ Chem Lett 15:15–22
Chinnamuthu CR, Boopathi PM (2009) Nanotechnology and agroecosystem. Madras Agric J
96:17–31
Choudhary RC, Kumaraswamy RV, Kumari S, Sharma SS, Pal A, Raliya R, Biswas P, Saharan V
(2017) Cu-chitosan nanoparticle boost defense responses and plant growth in maize (Zea mays
L.). Sci Rep 7:9754. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-017-08571-0
Cossins D (2014) Next generation: nanoparticles augment plant functions. The incorporation of syn-
thetic nanoparticles into plants can enhance photosynthesis and transform leaves into biochem-
ical sensors. The scientist, news & opinion, March 16. http://www.the-scientist.com/?articles.
view/articleNo/39440/title/Next-Generation–Nanoparticles-Augment-Plant-Functions/
da Silva AC, Deda DK, Bueno CC, Moraes AS, Da Roz AL, Yamaji FM, Prado RA, Viviani V,
Oliveira ON, Leite FL (2014) Nanobiosensors exploiting specific interactions between an
enzyme and herbicides in atomic force spectroscopy. J Nanosci Nanotechnol 14(9):6678–6684
54 D. Pandita
De Boodt MF, Hayes MH, Herbillon A (2013) Soil colloids and their associations in aggregates,
vol 214. Springer Science & Business Media, New York
De Rosa MC, Monreal C, Schnitzer M, Walsh R, Sultan Y (2010) Nanotechnology in fertilizers.
Nat Nanotechnol 5:91
Demirer GS, Zhang H, Matos JL, Goh NS, Cunningham FJ, Sung Y, Chang R, Aditham AJ, Chio
L, Cho MJ, Staskawicz B, Landry MP (2019) High aspect ratio nanomaterials enable delivery
of functional genetic material without DNA integration in mature plants. Nat Nanotech 14:456
Dimkpa CO, Bindraban PS (2016) Fortification of micronutrients for efficient agronomic produc-
tion: a review. Agron Sustain Dev 36:7
Dimkpa C, Bindraban P, McLean JE et al (2017) Methods for rapid testing of plant and soil nutri-
ents. In: Lichtfouse E (ed) Sustainable agriculture reviews. Springer, Cham, pp 1–43
Du D, Huang X, Cai J, Zhang A (2007) Comparison of pesticide sensitivity by electrochemical test
based on acetylcholinesterase biosensor. Biosens Bioelectron 23(2):285–289
Ebrahimi A, Galavi M, Ramroudi M, Moaveni P (2016) Effect of TiO2 nanoparticles on antioxi-
dant enzymes activity and biochemical biomarkers in pinto bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.). J Mol
Biol Res 6:58–66
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 134:151–160
El Hadrami A, Adam LR, El Hadrami I, Daayf F (2010) Chitosan in plant protection. Mar Drugs
8(4):968–987
Eleftheriadou M, Pyrgiotakis G, Demokritou P (2017) Nanotechnology to the rescue: using nano-
enabled approaches in microbiological food safety and quality. Curr Opin Biotechnol 44:87–
93. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copbio.2016.11.012
Etefagh R, Azhir E, Shahtahmasebi N (2013) Synthesis of CuO nanoparticles and fabrication
of nanostructural layer biosensors for detecting Aspergillus niger fungi. Scientia Iranica
20(3):1055–1058
Fang Y, Ramasamy RP (2015) Current and prospective methods for plant disease detection.
Biosensors 5(3):537–561
Farhang B (2009) Nanotechnology and applications in food safety. In: Barbosa-Canovas G,
Mortimer A, Lineback D, Spiess W, Buckle K, Colonna P (eds) Global issues in food science
and technology. Elsevier Inc., Cambridge, pp 401–410
FAO (2009) Food Security and Agricultural Mitigation in Developing Countries: Options for
Capturing Synergies. Rome, Italy. http://www.fao.org/docrep/012/i1318e/i1318e00.pdf
Fernández-Luqueño F, López-Valdez F, González-Rosas A, Miranda-Gómez JM (2016)
Bionanotechnology for the food production: challenges and perspectives. In: Bustos-Vázquez
MA, del Ángel-del Ángel JA (eds) Tecnología y desarrollo sustentable: avances en el apr-
ovechamiento de recursos agroindustriales. Universidad Autónoma de Tamaulipas y Colofón,
Mexico, pp 293–305
Fosso-Kankeu E, De Klerk CM, Botha TA, Waanders F, Phoku J, Pandey S (2016) The antifungal
activities of multi-walled carbon nanotubes decorated with silver, copper and zinc oxide par-
ticles. In: International conference on advances in science, engineering, technology and natural
resources (ICASETNR-16), Parys, South Africa, 24–25 November 2016, pp 55–59
Fraisse A, Temmam S, Deboosere N, Guillier L, Delobel A, Maris P et al (2011) Comparison of
chlorine and peroxyacetic-based disinfectant to inactivate Feline calicivirus, Murine norovirus
and Hepatitis A virus on lettuce. Int J Food Microbiol 151(1):98–104. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
ijfoodmicro.2011.08.011
Gajbhiye M, Kesharwani J, Ingle A, Gade A, Rai M (2009) Fungus-mediated synthesis of sil-
ver nanoparticles and their activity against pathogenic fungi in combination with fluconazole.
Nanomedicine 5:382–386
Galbraith DW (2007) Nanobiotechnology: silica breaks through in plants. Nat Nanotechnol
2:272–273
Gardea-Torresdey JL, Rico CM, White JC (2014) Trophic transfer, transformation, and impact
of engineered nanomaterials in terrestrial environments. Environ Sci Technol 48:2526–2540
Ghormade V, Deshpande MV, Paknikar KM (2011) Perspectives for nano-biotechnology enabled
protection and nutrition of plants. Biotechnol Adv 29:792–803. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
biotechadv.2011.06.007
Giraldo JP, Landry MP, Faltermeier SM et al (2014) Plant nanobionics approach to augment pho-
tosynthesis and biochemical sensing. Nat Mater 13:400–408
Giraldo JP, Landry MP, Kwak S, Jain RM, Wong MH, Iverson NM, Ben-Naim M, Strano MS
(2015) A ratiometric sensor using single chirality near infrared fluorescent carbon nanotubes:
application to in vivo monitoring. Small 32:3973–3984
Gopal MA, Gogoi RO, Srivastava CH, Kumar RA, Singh PK, Nair KK, Yadav SA, Goswami AR
(2011) Nanotechnology and its application in plant protection. In: Plant pathology in India:
vision 2030. Indian Phytopathological Society, Indian Agricultural Research Institute, New
Delhi, pp 224–232
Goswami A, Roy I, Sengupta S, Debnath N (2010) Novel applications of solid and liquid formula-
tions of nanoparticles against insect pests and pathogens. Thin Solid Films 519:1252–1257
Guarda A, Rubilar JF, Miltz J, Galotto MJ (2011) The antimicrobial activity of microencapsulated
thymol and carvacrol. Int J Food Microbiol 146(2):144–150
Han M, Gao X, Su JZ, Nie S (2001) Quantum-dot-tagged microbeads for multiplexed optical cod-
ing of biomolecules. Nat Biotechnol 19:631–635
Harper T (2015) The year of the trillion Dollar nanotechnology market? AZoNetwork UK Ltd.,
Manchester
Henry E, Yadeta KA, Coaker G (2013) Recognition of bacterial plant pathogens: local, systemic
and transgene rational immunity. New Phytol 199:908–915
Higueras L, Lopez-Carballo G, Cerisuelo JP, Gavara R, Hernandez-Munoz P (2013) Preparation
and characterization of chitosan/HP-β-cyclodextrins composites with high sorption capacity
for carvacrol. Carbohydr Polym 97(2):262–268
Hirsh S, Schiefer J, Gschwandtner A, Hartmann M (2014) The determinants of firm profitability
differences in EU food processing. J Agric Econ 65:703–721
Hong F, Yang F, Liu C, Gao Q, Wan Z, Gu F, Wu C, Ma Z, Zhou J, Yang P (2005) Influences of
nano-TiO2 on the chloroplast aging of spinach under light. Biol Trace Elem Res 104(3):249–260
Hooley G, Piercy NF, Nicoulaud B (2014) Marketing strategy and competitive positioning.
Prentice Hall/Financial Times, London. (ISBN 9780273740933)
Horvitz S, Cantalejo MJ (2014) Application of ozone for the postharvest treatment of fruits and
vegetables. Crit Rev Food Sci Nutr 54(3):312–339
Hu C, Liu Y, Li X, Li M (2013) Biochemical responses of duckweed (Spirodela polyrhiza) to zinc
oxide nanoparticles. Arch Environ Contam Toxicol 64:643–651
Huang L, Dian-Qing L, Yan-Jun W, Min David G, Xue ED (2005) Controllable preparation of
nano-MgO and investigation of its bactericidal properties. J Inorg Biochem 99:986–993
IFRI (2008) Nanotechnology, food, agriculture and development. IFPRI Policy Seminar—18 June
2008. Available at: http://www.ifpriblog.org/ 2008/06/24/nanotech seminar.aspx. Accessed 2
Dec 2008
Imada K, Sakai S, Kajihara H, Tanaka S, Ito S (2016) Magnesium oxide nanoparticles induce sys-
temic resistance in tomato against bacterial wilt disease. Plant Pathol 65:551–560
Ingale AG, Chaudhari AN (2013) Biogenic synthesis of nanoparticles and potential applica-
tions: an eco-friendly approach. J Nanomed Nanotechol 4:165. https://doi.org/10.4172/2157-
7439.1000165
Ismail M, Prasad R, Ibrahim AIM, Ahmed ISA (2017) Modern prospects of nanotechnology in
plant pathology. In: Prasad R, Kumar M, Kumar V (eds) Nanotechnology. Springer Nature
Singapore Pte Ltd, Singapore, pp 305–317
Jampílek J, Kráľová K (2015) Application of nanotechnology in agriculture and food industry, its
prospects and risks. Ecol Chem Eng S 22:321–361. https://doi.org/10.1515/eces-2015-0018
56 D. Pandita
Jha AK, Prasad K, Prasad K (2009) A green low-cost biosynthesis of Sb2O3 nanoparticles.
Biochem Eng J 43:303–306
genic fungi. Plant Dis 93:1037–1043. https://doi.org/10.1094/PDIS-93-10
Joseph T, Morrison M (2006) Nanotechnology in agriculture and food. Eur Nanotechnol Gateway.
ftp://ftp.cordis.europa.eu/pub/nanotechnology/docs/nanotechnology_in_agriculture_and_
food.pdf
Kabanov AV, Sahay G, Alakhova DY (2015) Endocytosis of nanomedicines. J Control Release
145:182–195
Kah M, Kookana RS, Gogos A, Bucheli TD (2018) A critical evaluation of nanopesticides and
nanofertilizers against their conventional analogues. Nat Nanotechnol 13:677–684. https://doi.
org/10.1038/s41565-018-0131-1
Karaca H, Velioglu YS (2007) Ozone applications in fruit and vegetable processing. Food Rev Intl
23(1):91–106. https://doi.org/10.1080/87559120600998221
Karny A, Zinger A, Kajal A, Shainsky-Roitman J, Schroeder A (2018) Therapeutic nanoparticles
penetrate leaves and deliver nutrients to agricultural crops. Sci Rep 8:7589
Kasprowicz MJ, Kozioł M, Gorczyca A (2010) The effect of silver nanoparticles on phytopatho-
genic spores of Fusarium culmorum. Can J Microbiol 56:247–253
Khan MR, Rizvi TF (2014) Nanotechnology: scope and application in plant disease management.
Plant Pathol J 13:214–231. https://doi.org/10.3923/ppj.2014
Khaydarov RR, Khaydarov RA, Evgrafova S, Estrin Y (2011) Using silver nanoparticles as an
antimicrobial agent. In: NATO science for peace and security series a: chemistry and biology.
Springer, Dordrecht, pp 169–177
Khodakovskaya MV, de Silva K, Biris AS, Dervishi E, Villagarcia H (2012) Carbon nanotubes
induce growth enhancement of tobacco cells. ACS Nano 6:2128–2135
Kim SW, Jung JH, Lamsal K, Kim YS, Min JS, Lee YS (2012a) Antifungal effects of silver
nanoparticles(AgNPs) against various plant pathogenic fungi. Mycobiology 40(1):53–58
Kim S, Lee S, Lee I (2012b) Alteration of phytotoxicity and oxidant stress potential by metal oxide
nanoparticles in Cucumis sativus. Water Air Soil Pollut 223(5):2799–2806
Koseki S, Yoshida K, Isobe S, Itoh K (2004) Efficacy of acidic electrolyzed water for microbial
decontamination of cucumbers and strawberries. J Food Prot 67(6):1247–1251. http://www.
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15222559
Kuswandi B, Restanty A, Abdullah A, Heng LY, Ahmad M (2012) A novel colorimetric food pack-
age label for fish spoilage based on polyaniline film. Food Control 25:184
Kwak SY, Lew TTS, Sweeney CJ, Koman VB, Wong MH, Bohmert-Tatarev K, Snell KD, Seo JS,
Chua NH, Strano MS (2019) Chloroplast-selective gene delivery and expression in planta using
chitosan-complexed single-walled carbon nanotube carriers. Nature Nanotechnol 14:447.
https://doi.org/10.1038/s41565-019-0375-4
Lahiani MH, Chen J, Irin F, Puretzky AA, Green MJ, Khodakovskaya MV (2015) Interaction of
carbon nanohorns with plants: uptake and biological effects. Carbon 81:607–619
Lal R (2015) The nexus approach to managing water, soil and waste under changing climate
and growing demands on natural resources. In: Kurian M, Ardakanian R (eds) Governing the
nexus: water, soil and waste resources considering global change. Springer, Cham, pp 39–61.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-05747-7_3
Lee S, Kim S, Kim S, Lee I (2013) Assessment of phytotoxicity of ZnO NPs on a medicinal plant,
Fagopyrum esculentum. Environ Sci Pollut Res 20:848–854
Lew TTS, Wong MH, Kwak SY, Sinclair R, Koman VB, Strano MS (2018) Rational design prin-
ciples for the transport and subcellular distribution of nanomaterials into plant protoplasts.
Small 14(44):e1802086. https://doi.org/10.1002/smll.201802086
Li Y, Cu YT, Luo D (2005) Multiplexed detection of pathogen DNA with DNA based fluorescence
nanobarcodes. Nat Biotechnol 23:885–889
Li M, Shi P, Xu C, Ren JS, Qu XG (2013) Cerium oxide caged metal chelator: antiaggregation
and antioxidation integrated H2O2 responsive controlled drug release for potential Alzheimer’s
disease treatment. Chem Sci 4:2536–2542
Li Y, Yang D, Cui J (2017) Graphene oxide loaded with copper oxide nanoparticles as an antibacte-
rial agent against Pseudomonas syringae pv. tomato. RSC Adv 7:38853–38860
Liao F, Chen C, Subramanian V (2005) Organic TFTs as gas sensors for electronic nose applica-
tions. Sens Actuators B Chem 107(2):849–855
Lin D, Xing B (2007) Phytotoxicity of nanoparticles: inhibition of seed germination and root
growth. Environ Pollut 150:243–250
Lin HY, Huang CH, Lu SH, Kuo IT, Chau LK (2014) Direct detection of orchid viruses using
nanorod-based fiber optic particle plasmon resonance immunosensor. Biosens Bioelectron
51:371–378
Liu X, Feng Z, Zhang S, Zhang J, Xiao Q, Wang Y (2006) Preparation and testing of cement-
ing nano-subnano composites of slow- or controlled release of fertilizers. Sci Agric Sin 39:
1598–1604
Liu Z, Fan AC, Rakhra K, Sherlock S, Goodwin A, Chen X, Yang Q, Felsher DW, Dai H (2009)
Supramolecular stacking of doxorubicin on carbon nanotubes for in vivo cancer therapy. Angew
Chemie Int Edn 48:7668–7672
Lopez MM, Llop P, Olmos A, Marco-Noales E, Cambra M, Bertolini E (2009) Are molecular tools
solving the challenges posed by detection of plant pathogenic bacteria and viruses? Curr Issues
Mol Biol 11:13–46
Mahendra R, Shivaji D, Aniket G, Elsalam KA (2012) Strategic nanoparticle-mediated gene trans-
fer in plants and animals—a novel approach. Curr Nanosci 8:170–179
Malerba M, Crosti P, Cerana R (2012) Defense/stress responses activated by chitosan in sycamore
cultured cells. Protoplasma 249:89–98
Manjunatha SB, Biradar DP, Aladakatti YR (2016) Nanotechnology and its applications in agricul-
ture: a review. J Farm Sci 29:1–3
Martin-Gullon I, Vera J, Conesa JA, González JL, Merino C (2006) Differences between car-
bon nanofibers produced using Fe and Ni catalysts in a floating catalyst reactor. Carbon
44:1572–1580
Martin-Ortigosa S, Valenstein JS, Lin VS, Trewyn BG, Wang K (2012) Gold functionalized meso-
porous silica nanoparticle mediated protein and DNA codelivery to plant cells via the biolistic
method. Adv Funct Mater 22:3576–3582
Martin-Ortigosa S, Peterson DJ, Valenstein JS, Lin VS, Trewyn BG, Lyznik LA, Wang K (2014)
Mesoporous silica nanoparticle-mediated intracellular Cre protein delivery for maize genome
editing via loxP site excision. Plant Physiol 164:537–547
McCann HC, Nahal H, Thakur S, Guttman DS (2012) Identification of innate immunity elicitors
using molecular signatures of natural selection. Proc Natl Acad Sci 109:4215–4220
Meir R, Motiei M, Popovtzer R (2014) Gold nanoparticles for in vivo cell tracking. Nanomedicine
(Lond) 9:2059–2069
Mohammadi S, Khalafi-Nezhad A (2012) Chitosan supported hexa-sulfooxymethyl melamine
nanoparticles: a green and recyclable biopolymer catalyst for multicomponent reaction. In:
Proceedings of the fourth international conference on nanostructures (ICNS4), 12–14 Mar
2012, Kish Island, Iran
Biol Sci 1:414–419
Musarrat J, Dwivedi S, Singh BR, Al-Khedhairy AA, Azam A, Naqvi A (2010) Production of
antimicrobial silver nanoparticles in water extracts of the fungus Amylomyces rouxii strain
KSU-09. Bioresour Technol 101:8772–8776
Nachay K (2007) Analyzing nanotechnology. Food Technol 61(1):34–36
Nair R, Varghese SH, Nair BG, Maekawa T, Yoshida Y, Sakthi Kumar D (2010) Nanoparticulate
material delivery to plants. Plant Sci 179:154–163
Nath D (2015) Safer nanoformulation for the next decade. In: Basiuk VA, Basiuk EV (eds) Green
processes for nanotechnology. Springer International Publishing, Cham, pp 327–352. https://
doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-15461-9_12
58 D. Pandita
Neethirajan S, Freund M, Jayas D, Shafai C, Thomson D, White N (2010) Development of carbon

dioxide (CO2) sensor for grain quality monitoring. Biosyst Eng 106(4):395–404
Newell DG, Koopmans M, Verhoef L, Duizer E, Aidara-Kane A, Sprong H, Kruse H (2010) Food-
borne diseases -the challenges of 20 years ago still persist while new ones continue to emerge.
Int J Food Microbiol 139:S3–S15
Nima ZA, Lahiani MH, Watanabe F, Xu Y, Khodakovskaya MV, Biris AS (2014) Plasmonically
active nanorods for delivery of bio-active agents and high-sensitivity SERS detection in planta.
RSC Adv 4:64985–64993
Nugaeva N, Gfeller KY, Backmann N, Lang HP, Duggelin M, Hegner M (2005) Micromechanical
cantilever array sensors for selective fungal immobilization and fast growth detection. Biosens
Bioelectron 21:849–856
Oh SD, Lee S, Choi SH, Lee IS, Lee YM, Chun JH, Park HJ (2006) Synthesis of Ag and Ag-SiO2
nanoparticles by γ-irradiation and their antibacterial and antifungal efficiency against
Salmonella enterica serovar Typhimurium and Botrytis cinerea. Colloids Surf Physicochem
Eng Asp 275:228–233
Pal S, Ying W, Alocilja EC, Downes FP (2008) Sensitivity and specificity performance of a direct-
charge transfer biosensor for detecting Bacillus cereus in selected food matrices. Biosyst Eng
99(4):461–468
Pao S, Kelsey DF, Khalid MF, Ettinger MR (2007) Using aqueous chlorine dioxide to prevent con-
tamination of tomatoes with Salmonella enterica and Erwinia carotovora during fruit washing.
J Food Prot 70(3):629–634. https://doi.org/10.4315/0362-028X-70.3.629
Patel N, Desai P, Patel N, Jha A, Gautam HK (2014) Agronanotechnology for plant fungal disease
management: a review. Int J Curr Microbiol App Sci 3:71–84
Pehanich M (2006) Small gains in processing, packaging. Food Process 11:46–48
pp 381–394
Prasad R, Bagde US, Varma A (2012) Intellectual property rights and agricultural biotechnology:
an overview. Afr J Biotechnol 11(73):13746–13752
Prasad R, Kumar V, Prasad KS (2014) Nanotechnology in sustainable agriculture: present con-
cerns and future aspects. Afr J Biotechnol 13(6):705–713
Prasad R, Bhattacharyya A, Nguyen QD (2017) Nanotechnology in sustainable agriculture: recent
developments, challenges, and perspectives. Front Microbiol 8:1014. https://doi.org/10.3389/
fmicb.2017.01014
Priester JH, Ge Y, Mielke RE et al (2012) Soybean susceptibility to manufactured nanomaterials
with evidence for food quality and soil fertility interruption. PNAS 109:E2451–E2456
Priyanka N, Venkatachalam P (2016) Biofabricated zinc oxide nanoparticles coated with phyco-
molecules as novel micronutrient catalysts for stimulating plant growth of cotton. Adv Nat Sci
Nanosci Nanotechnol 7:045018. http://iopscience.iop.org/2043-6262/7/4/045018
Pyrgiotakis G, Vasanthakumar A, Gao Y, Eleftheriadou M, Toledo E, DeAraujo A, Demokritou
P (2015) Inactivation of foodborne microorganisms using Engineered Water Nanostructures
(EWNS). Environ Sci Technol 49(6):3737–3745. https://doi.org/10.1021/es505868a
Pyrgiotakis G, Vedantam P, Cirenza C, McDevitt J, Eleftheriadou M, Leonard SS, Demokritou
P (2016) Optimization of a nanotechnology based antimicrobial platform for food safety
applications using Engineered Water Nanostructures (EWNS). Sci Rep 6:21073. https://doi.
org/10.1038/srep21073
Rai V, Acharya S, Dey N (2012) Implications of nanobiosensors in agriculture. J Biomaterials
Nanobiotechnol 3:315–324
Rangaraj SR, Gopalu K, Muthusamy P, Rathinam Y, Venkatachalam R, Narayanasamy K (2014)
Augmented biocontrol action of silica nanoparticles and Pseudomonas fluorescens bioformu-
lant in maize (Zea mays L.). RSC Adv 4:8461–8465
Resham S, Khalid M, Gul Kazi A (2015) Nanobiotechnology in agricultural development. In: Barh
D et al (eds) PlantOmics: the omics of plant science. Springer, New Delhi, pp 683–698. https://
doi.org/10.1007/978-81-322-2172-2_24
Rico D, Martín-Diana AB, Barat JM, Barry-Ryan C (2007) Extending and measuring the quality
of fresh-cut fruit and vegetables: a review. Trends Food Sci Technol 18(7):373–386. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.tifs.2007.03.011
Robert-Seilaniantz A, Grant M, Jones JD (2011) Hormone crosstalk in plant disease and defense:
more than just jasmonate–salicylate antagonism. Annu Rev Phytopathol 49:317–343
Rubina RS, Vasil’kov AY, Naumkin AV, Shtykova EV, Abramchuk SS, Alghuthaymi MA, Abd-
Elsalam KA (2017) Synthesis and characterization of chitosan–copper nanocomposites and
their fungicidal activity against two sclerotia–forming plant pathogenic fungi. J Nanostruct
Chem 7:249–258. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40097–017–0235–4
Ruder AM (2006) Potential health effects of occupational chlorinated solvent exposure. Ann N Y
Acad Sci 1076(1):207–227
Rudnick SN, McDevitt JJ, First MW, Spengler JD (2009) Inactivating influenza viruses on surfaces
using hydrogen peroxide or triethylene glycol at low vapor concentrations. Am J Infect Control
37(10):813–819. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajic.2009.06.007
Sadowski Z (2010) Biosynthesis and application of silver and gold nanoparticles. In: Perez DP (ed)
Silver nanoparticles. InTech, Rijeka
Saharan V, Mehrotra A, Khatik R, Rawal P, Sharma SS, Pal A (2013) Synthesis of chitosan based
nanoparticles and their in vitro evaluation against phytopathogenic fungi. Int J Biol Macromol
62:677–683. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2013.10.012
Salamanca-Buentello F, Persad D, Court E, Martin D, Daar A, Singer P (2005) Nanotechnology
and the developing world. PLoS Med 2(5):97
Samra JS, Sharma PD (2009) Food security – Indian scenario. In: Proceedings. IPI-OUAT-IPNI
international symposium. International Potash Institute/International Plant Nutrition Institute,
Horgen/Norcross, pp 15–43
Scott N, Chen H (2003) Nano scale science and engineering for agriculture and food systems. In:
National Planning Workshop, Washington, DC, USA, 18–19 Nov 2003, pp 1–61. http://www.
nseafs.cornell.edu/web.roadmap.pdf
Scrinis G, Lyons K (2007) The emerging nano-corporate paradigm: nanotechnology and the trans-
formation of nature, food and agri-food systems. J Soc Food Agric 15(2):22–44
Sekhon BS (2014) Nanotechnology in Agri-food production: an overview. Nanotechnol Sci Appl
7:31–53
Serag MF, Kaji N, Habuchi S, Bianco A, Baba Y (2013) Nanobiotechnology meets plant cell biol-
ogy: carbon nanotubes as organelle targeting nanocarriers. RSC Adv 3(15):4856–4863
Serag MF, Kaji N, Tokeshi M, Baba Y (2015) Carbon nanotubes and modern nanoagriculture. In:
Siddiqui M, Al-Whaibi M, Mohammad F (eds) Nanotechnology and plant sciences. Springer,
Cham, pp 183–201
Servin A, Elmer W, Mukherjee A, De la Torre-Roche R, Hamdi H, White JC, Bindraban P, Dimkpa
C (2015) A review of the use of engineered nanomaterials to suppress plant disease and enhance
crop yield. J Nanopart Res 17:92. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11051-015-2907-7
Shah MA, Towkeer A (2010) Principles of nanosciences and nanotechnology. Narosa Publishing
House, New Delhi
Shapira P, Youtie J (2015) The economic contributions of nanotechnology to green and sustain-
able growth. In: Basiuk VA, Basiuk EV (eds) Green processes for nanotechnology. Springer
International Publishing, Cham, pp 409–434. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-15461-9_15
Sharma VK, Yngard RA, Lin Y (2009) Silver nanoparticles: green synthesis and their antimicro-
bial activities. Adv Colloid Interf Sci 145:83–96
Sharma K, Sharma R, Shit S, Gupta S (2012) Nanotechnological application on diagnosis of a
plant disease. In: International conference on advances in biological and medical sciences,
Singapore, 15–16 July, pp 149–150
60 D. Pandita
safety. J Phytology 2:83–92
Singh M, Singh S, Prasad S, Gambhir IS (2008) Nanotechnology in medicine and antibacterial
effect of silver nanoparticles. Digest J Nanomat Biostruct 3(3):115–122
Singh S, Singh M, Agrawal VV, Kumar A (2010) An attempt to develop surface Plasmon reso-
nance based immuno sensor for Karnal bunt (Tilletia indica) diagnosis based on the experience
of nano-gold based lateral flow immune-dipstick test. Thin Solid Films 519:1156–1159
Smirnova EA, Gusev AA, Zaitseva ON, Lazareva EM, Onishchenko GE, Kuznetsova EV, Tkachev
AG, Feofanov AV, Kirpichnikov MP (2011) Multi-walled carbon nanotubes penetrate into
plant cells and affect the growth of Onobrychis arenaria seedlings. Acta Nat 3(1):99–106
Sozer N, Kokini JL (2009) Nanotechnology and its applications in the food sector. Trends
Biotechnol 27(2):82–89
Srinivasan C, Saraswathi R (2010) Nano-agriculture-carbon nanotubes enhance tomato seed ger-
mination and plant growth. Curr Sci 99:273–275
Suriyaprabha R, Karunakaran G, Kavitha K, Yuvakkumar R, Rajendran V, Kannan N (2014)
Application of silica nanoparticles in maize to enhance fungal resistance. IET Nanobiotechnol
8(3):133–137
Tan XM, Lin C, Fugetsu B (2009) Studies on toxicity of multi-walled carbon nanotubes on suspen-
sion rice cells. Carbon 47:3479–3487
Tarafdar JC, Sharma S, Raliya R (2013) Nanotechnology: interdisciplinary science of applications.
Afr J Biotechnol 12(3):219–226
Teodoro S, Micaela B, David KW (2010) Novel use of nano-structured alumina as an insecticide.
Pest Manag Sci 66(6):577–579
Thwala M, Musee N, Sikhwivhilu L, Wepener V (2013) The oxidative toxicity of Ag and ZnO
nanoparticles towards the aquatic plant Spirodela punctuta and the role of testing media param-
eters. Environ Sci Process Impacts 15:1830–1843
Torney F (2009) Nanoparticle mediated plant transformation. In: Emerging technologies in plant
science research. Interdepartmental plant physiology major fall seminar series. Physics 696
Torney F, Trewyn BG, Lin VS-Y, Wang K (2007) Mesoporous silica nanoparticles deliver DNA
and chemicals into plants. Nat Nanotechnol 2:295–300
Tripathi DK, Gaur S, Singh S, Singh S, Pandey R, Singh VP, Sharma NC, Prasad SM, Dubey
NK, Chauhan DK (2016) An overview on manufactured nanoparticles in plants: uptake,
translocation, accumulation and phytotoxicity. Plant Physiol Biochem 110:2–12. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.plaphy.2016.07.030
Tripathi DK, Singh S, Singh VP, Prasad SM, Dubey NK, Chauhan DK (2017) Silicon nanopar-
ticles more effectively alleviated UV-B stress than silicon in wheat (Triticum aestivum) seed-
lings. Plant Physiol Biochem 110:70–81
USDA (2003) Nano-scale science and engineering for agriculture and food systems: a report
submitted to cooperative state research, research, education and extension service. National
Planning Workshop November 18–19, 2002. Washington, DC Co-Chairs: Dr. Norman Scott,
Cornell University, Dr. Hongda Chen, CSREES/USDA
USDA (2014) Cost estimates of foodborne illnesses. Retrieved 10 Apr 2019, from https://www.ers.
usda.gov/data-products/cost-estimates-of-foodborne-illnesses/
Vamvakaki V, Chaniotakis NA (2007) Pesticide detection with a liposome-based nano-biosensor.
Biosens Bioelectron 22(12):2848–2853
Van Boxstael S, Habib I, Jacxsens L, De Vocht M, Baert L, Van De Perre E et al (2013) Food safety
issues in fresh produce: bacterial pathogens, viruses and pesticide residues indicated as major
concerns by stakeholders in the fresh produce chain. Food Control 32(1):190–197. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.foodcont.2012.11.038
Vaze N, Jiang Y, Lucas M, Zhang Y, Bello D, Leonard SS, Morris AM, Eleftheriadou M, Pyrgiotakis
G, Demokritou P (2018) An integrated electrolysis – electrospray – ionization antimicrobial
platform using Engineered Water Nanostructures (EWNS) for food safety applications. Food
Control 85:151–160. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodcont.2017.09.034
Verma ML (2017) Enzymatic nanobiosensors in the agricultural and food industry. In: Ranjan S,
Dasgupta N, Lichtfouse E (eds) Nanoscience in food and agriculture 4. Sustainable agriculture
reviews, vol 24. Springer, Cham, pp 229–245
Wang T, Yang L, Zhang B, Liu J (2010) Extracellular biosynthesis and transformation of selenium
nanoparticles and application in H2O2 biosensor. Colloids Surf B Biointerfaces 80(1):94–102
Wang H, Wu F, Meng W, White JC, Holden PA, Xing B (2013) Engineered nanoparticles may
induce genotoxicity. Environ Sci Technol 47:13212–13214
Wang H, Ma H, Zheng W, An D, Na C (2014) Multifunctional and recollectable carbon nanotube
ponytails for water purification. ACS Appl Mater Interfaces 6:9426–9434
Wang L, Liu Y, Liu J, Zhang Y, Zhang X, Pan H (2016) The gene is required for apothecial devel-
opment. Phytopathology 106(5):484–490
WHO (2015) News release. Retrieved 10 Apr 2019, from http://www.who.int/mediacentre/news/
releases/2015/foodborne-disease-estimates/en/
World Health Organization (2008) Food borne disease outbreaks: Guidelines for investigation and
control. http://www.apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/10665/43771/1/ 9789241547222_ eng.pdf
Wong MH, Misra R, Giraldo JP, Kwak SY, Son YW, Landry MP et al (2016) Lipid exchange
envelope penetration (LEEP) of nanoparticles for plant engineering: a universal localization
mechanism. Nano Lett 16:1161–1172
Xing K, Zhu X, Peng X, Qin S (2015) Chitosan antimicrobial and eliciting properties for pest
control in agriculture: a review. Agron Sustain Dev 35(2):569–588
Yang FL, Li XG, Zhu F, Lei CL (2009) Structural characterization of nanoparticles loaded
with garlic essential oil and their insecticidal activity against Tribolium castaneum (Herbst)
(Coleoptera: Tenebrionidae). J Agric Food Chem 57(21):10156–10162
Yao KS, Li SJ, Tzeng KC, Cheng TC, Chang CY (2009) Fluorescence silica nanoprobe as a bio-
marker for rapid detection of plant pathogens. Adv Mater Res 79–82:513–516
Zarei F, Negahdari B, Eatemadi A (2018) Diabetic ulcer regeneration: stem cells, biomaterials,
growth factors. Artif Cells Nanomed Biotechnol 46(1):26–32
Zhang Y, Niu Y, Lou Y, Ge M, Yang T, Yu L (2014) Fabrication, characterization and antimicrobial
activities of thymol-loaded zinc nanoparticles stabilized by sodium caseinate-chitosan hydro-
chloride double layers. Food Chem 142:269–275
Zhang Y, Arugula MA, Wales M, Wild J, Simonian AL (2015) A novel layer-by-layer assembled
multi-enzyme/CNT biosensor for discriminative detection between organophosphorus and
non-organophosphorus pesticides. Biosens Bioelectron 67:287–295
Zhang JJ, Li Z, Zhao S, Lu Y (2016) Size-dependent modulation of graphene oxide–aptamer inter-
actions for an amplified fluorescence-based detection of aflatoxin B1 with a tunable dynamic
range. Analyst 141:4029–4034
Zheng B, Qian L, Yuan H, Xiao D, Yang X, Paau MC et al (2010) Preparation of gold nanoparticles
on eggshell membrane and their biosensing application. Talanta 82(1):177–183
Role of Nanotechnology in Crop
Improvement
John Mohd War, Mohammad Afaan Fazili, Waseem Mushtaq,

Abdul Hamid Wani, and Mohd Yaqub Bhat
1 Introduction
Agriculture is considered as the backbone of most developing countries, having

more than 60% of their population dependent on it for their livelihood (Raliya et al.
2017). In the twenty-first century, agriculture is facing diverse challenges for pro-
ducing more food by addressing the problems of fast growing population, diminish-
ing agricultural productivity, unpredictable climate change, variable labor force,
and ever increasing urbanization. By 2050, these problems seem to intensify
extremely, thus creates a major challenge to feed the population of over nine billion,
and hence 50–70% of more food needs to be produced to feed them enough (Naderi
and Shahraki 2013). As a source of food, feed, and fiber, agriculture has always
been increasingly important in a world of declining resources with rapidly increas-
ing global population (Brennan 2012). In order to come up with the solution of these
emerging problems, agriculture-dependent countries need to adopt more advanced
technologies, labor-saving practices, and innovative methods. In this scenario, the
most recent technical improvement in the field of agriculture that holds a remark-
able position in remodeling agriculture and food production and also fulfills the
J. M. War · A. H. Wani · M. Y. Bhat

Section of Mycology and Plant Pathology, Department of Botany, University of Kashmir,
Jammu and Kashmir, India
M. A. Fazili (*)
Advanced Plant Physiology Section, Department of Botany, Aligarh Muslim University,
Aligarh, Uttar Pradesh, India
W. Mushtaq
Allelopathy Laboratory, Department of Botany, Aligarh Muslim University,

64 J. M. War et al.
Nanotechnology
Crop Crop Crop Food

Improvement Production Protection Processing
Nutrient Post harvest &

Nanobiotechnology Disease Management
Management food preservation
Seed Management Precision Farming Pest Management Food processing

& packaging
Weed Management
Fig. 1 Various applications of nanotechnology in agriculture sector
demands in an efficient and cost-effective way is nanotechnology. It is a promising

tool that has the potential to foster a new era of precise farming techniques and
hence may evolve as a possible solution for the current agricultural issues. There
may be increase in agricultural potential so as to harvest higher yields in an eco-
friendly way even in the challenging environments (Sugunan and Dutta 2008).
Nanotechnology is expected as a potential complement to genetic engineering and
molecular plant breeding besides traditional plant breeding in the near future.
Nanotechnology may work in multiple dimensions to benefit agriculture as it has
the potential to play critical role in food production, food security, and food safety
(Fig. 1). Its introduction in agriculture aims particularly to increase the yield based
on nutrient management optimization, minimal nutrient loss in fertilization, and
reduced application of plant protection chemicals (Chen et al. 2013) as well as to
enhance the food quality by using strategies like monitoring plant growth, detection
of diseases, increased plant protection, and reduced waste for strengthening agricul-
ture sustainability (Frewer et al. 2011; Biswal et al. 2012; Ditta 2012; Prasad et al.
2012; Sonkaria et al. 2012; Pérez-de-Luque and Hermosín 2013; Pirzadah et al.
2019). Agro-nanotechnology currently focuses on target farming involving the use
of nanoparticles (NPs) in order to boost crop and livestock productivity (Scott and
Chen 2013; Batsmanova et al. 2013). Due to unique features of nanoparticles, they
have been used in all stages of agricultural production in varied forms and proce-
dures such as crop improvement (Tarafdar et al. 2014), plant protection ingredients
(pesticides, fungicides, weedicides) (Park et al. 2006; Corradini 2010), nanofertil-
izer for balance crop nutrition (Janmohammadi et al. 2016; Abobatta 2017), moni-
toring the identity and quality of agricultural produce (Rameshaiah et al. 2015),
nanosensors (Das et al. 2009), post-harvest technology (Meetoo 2011), bioprocess-
ing of nanoparticles for agricultural use (Tarafdar et al. 2014), nanobiotechnology
(Galbraith 2007), seed technology (Bharathi et al. 2016), plant growth regulators
(Choy et al. 2007), soil management (Klingenfuss 2014), agricultural engineering
Role of Nanotechnology in Crop Improvement 65
aspects (González-Melendi et al. 2008), etc. Due to its rapid development, nano-
technology is expected to change greatly many areas of food science and industry
with increasing investment and market share (He and Hwang 2016; Yata et al. 2018).
In the field of crop improvement, scientists are trying to disclose the inherent poten-
tial of the nanotechnology through an array of experiments in different directions by
taking the advantage of biotechnology (called as Nanobiotechnology). The use of
nanoparticles in crop science is developing a great interest among the researchers
because of their various beneficial effects (Zheng et al. 2005). A number of studies
showed positive response towards plant growth and development on exposure to
nanoparticles (Lu et al. 2002; Shah and Belozerova 2009; Sharon et al. 2010;
Sheykhbaglou et al. 2010; Kole et al. 2013; Razzaq et al. 2016) and their role in
relation to their uptake, internalization, translocation, and persistence has been well
presented and documented in many research articles.
Nanotechnology is emerging as a paradigm shift and is evolving as an encourag-
ing tool to initiate a new era of precise farming techniques and methods, hence may
furnish with a possible solution for enhanced agricultural productivity and crop
improvement (Misra et al. 2016). It will strengthen the mission towards evergreen
revolution with limited inputs but maximum output. Although implementation of
nanotechnology for agriculture sustainability is in its infancy stage, there are excep-
tional and unparalleled examples of nanoparticles where it has energized agriculture
in many ways. In the present chapter, influences of different nanoparticles (carbon,
metal-based, and metal oxide) on various growth parameters of different crop plants
have been presented. Beneficial role of nanoparticles through plant biomass and
yield, seed germination, increased root-shoot length as well as enhancement in
secondary metabolite production of various crop plants including onion, cucumber,
tomato, soybean, rice, maize, wheat, potato, chickpea, barley, mustard, mung bean,
cluster bean cabbage, etc. has been discussed throughout the chapter.
2 Agro-Nanotechnology and Crop Improvement
Nanotechnology is an emerging field to revolutionize the agriculture and food sec-

tor. The properties of nanoparticles such as small size, large surface-to-volume
ratio, enhanced solubility, chemical reactivity, optical and magnetic properties made
them unique in the various fields especially in the agricultural sector. The introduc-
tion of nanotechnology in agriculture is getting importance due to reduced agricul-
tural inputs, enhanced food values, improved nutrient contents and longer shelf life,
freshness and quality of food by preventing gas penetration as well as by enhancing
micronutrient and antioxidant absorption via preserving and packaging nanomateri-
als (Kanjana 2015). Its novelty has revolutionized and benefitted many of the agri-
cultural aspects such as crop improvement, crop management, protection of crops
via genetic improvements, target-specific delivery of genes, drugs, and other bio-
molecules (e.g., nucleotides, proteins, and activators), controlled release of agro-
chemicals (nutrients, fertilizers, pesticides, herbicides), gene expressions in plants
and animals under stress conditions based on nano-array gene technologies, early
66 J. M. War et al.
detection of diseases and pests by nanosensors, seed management and their protec-
tion from pathogens and maintaining their genetic purity by separation of unviable
and infected seeds (Chinnamuthu and Boopathi 2009). Due to its rapid progression
and development towards possible solutions, nanotechnology is considered to play
its important roles for the current problems in the field of agriculture (Abobatta
2018). A number of patents and products have been developed where nanomaterials
have been incorporated into agricultural practices, for instance, nanopesticides,
nanofertilizers, and nanosensors (Servin et al. 2015).
The advantageous role of nanoparticles in crop plants has been evidenced through
effective demonstration of enhanced percentage in seed germination (Lu et al. 2002;
Nair et al. 2010; Gopinath et al. 2014), increased shoot and root length (Liu et al.
2005; Hafeez et al. 2015), increased yield of fruits, enhancement in metabolite con-
tent (Kole et al. 2013), and a substantial increase in vegetative biomass of seedlings
and plants in many crops. Likewise, the influence of nanoparticles in many bio-
chemical parameters related to plant growth and development has also been reported,
viz. enhanced photosynthetic rate and nitrogen use efficiency in many crop plants
including soybean (Ngo et al. 2014), peanut (Prasad et al. 2012; Liu et al. 2005),
spinach (Zheng et al. 2005; Hong et al. 2005; Yang et al. 2006; Gao et al. 2008;
Klaine et al. 2008; Linglan et al. 2008). A much better understanding of the nature
of dynamic interactions between nanoparticles (NPs) and plant responses, such as
their uptake, localization, and activity, could significantly revolutionize crop pro-
duction through increased resistance against diseases, nutrient utilization, and crop
yield (Wang et al. 2016). Nanoscale materials can provide programmed, time-
controlled, target-specific, self-regulated, and many more multifunctional capabili-
ties (Nair et al. 2010). For example, engineered nanoparticles (ENPs) can deliver
agrochemicals in an “on-demand” manner, which may serve either as nutritional
demand or protection against pathogens and pests. Hence nanotechnology provides
a way to avoid regular and repeated application of conventional agrochemicals and
thus reduces adverse effects on plants as well as environment. In addition to this,
nanoparticle-mediated targeted delivery of various phytoactive molecules including
nucleotides and proteins has the capability to regulate plant metabolism and their
genetic modification.
3 ole of Nanotechnology for Enhancement of Plant

R
Biomass and Yield Production
3.1 rop Growth on Exposure to Carbon

C
Nanomaterials (CNMs)
In a long list of nanoparticles (NPs), the most significant group is formed by carbon
nanomaterials (CNMs) due to their unique chemical, electrical, mechanical, and
thermal properties. Carbon nanomaterials (CNMs) including single-/multi-walled
carbon nanotubes (SWCNTs/MWCNTs), C60/70 fullerenes, carbon NPs, and
fullerols have attracted the interest of researchers because of their potential to

enhance crop growth (Khot et al. 2012). However, there are many studies which
show contradictory results based on size and concentration of NPs and also on plant
species. For example, carbon nanotubes (CNTs) enhanced root elongation in
cucumber and onion, but on the other hand it significantly reduced the root length in
tomato plants (Canas et al. 2008). In a study, the effect of SWCNTs, MWCNTs,
graphene, and bulk activated carbon (AC) was carried out using tomato plants that
were grown in artificial medium wherein the results revealed that SWCNTs and
MWCNTs helped in increased seed germination and plant biomass due to enhanced
water uptake efficiency. It was shown that MWCNTs acts at the molecular level and
significantly altered the gene expression such as the genes for water channel pro-
teins called aquaporins (Mariya et al. 2011). Same research group in a separate
study examined the potential control of MWCNTs on seed germination and growth
of tobacco cell culture. Different concentrations (5–500 μg/ml) were used and it was
found that growth of tobacco cell culture enhanced by 55–64% over the control;
however, under the effect of activated carbon (AC), improved cell growth (16%)
was observed at lower concentration (5 μg/ml), while at higher concentrations
(100–500 μg/ml) intense inhibition was recorded in the cellular growth. A correla-
tion was established between the stimulation of growth of cells exposed to
MWCNTs, the upregulatory genes (responsible for cell division/cell wall forma-
tion) and water transport. It was shown that specific genes are involved in the regu-
lation of cell division and extension by MWCNTs which is associated with the
activation of aquaporins (Khodakovskaya et al. 2012). Soil-based life cycle study
with tomato plants treated to MWCNTs and AC showed that water consumption,
flower number, and plant height were all higher in soil exposed with MWCNTs as
compared to AC exposed plants and control (Khodakovskaya et al. 2013). The effect
of MWCNTs on other crop plants including barley, soybean, and corn grown in agar
medium at concentrations of 50–200 mg/L in relation to their seed germination and
growth for a period of 11 days was carried out and it was found that germination in
all the species was enhanced by 50% besides increased shoot development in corn
and soybean. The accumulation of MWCNTs was done by transmission electron
microscopy (TEM) and Raman spectroscopy (Lahiani et al. 2013). In related work,
chickpea was exposed to citric acid-coated CNTs at 6 g/L for 10 days which resulted
in its intercellular uptake and stimulation of growth of the plant seedling. It was
suggested from the experiments that an aligned network was formed inside the vas-
cular tissue by these nanotubes that subsequently enhanced water efficiency uptake
(Tripathi et al. 2011). Utilization of CNTs for enhanced water transport in dry and
arid zone agriculture was supposed to be much effective and plausible for improv-
ing crop biomass and yield of plants like maize (Tiwari et al. 2014). Similarly, the
exposure of water-soluble carbon nano-dot at a concentration of 150 mg/L was
shown to help in enhanced growth of roots in case of wheat plant (Tiwari et al.
2014). As such, the influence of fullerol [C60 (OH)20] or water-soluble fullerenes on
bitter melon was studied and the results revealed that exposed plants had a 54–128%
increase in biomass and fruit yield. There was also an increased level of antidia-
betic (charantin, insulin) and anticancer (cucurbitacin-B, lycopene) compounds.
68 J. M. War et al.
The accumulation and translocation of fullerols were demonstrated by Fourier

transform infrared spectroscopy (FTIR) and bright-field imaging techniques (Kole
et al. 2013). Lastly, it has been proposed that fullerene C60, and CNTs possess the
potential to improve biomass and yield in plants up to ~118% and also help in water
retention capacity (Husen and Siddiqi 2014). All these findings suggest that CNMs
may be considered as a promising nanoscale amendment for improving plant growth
and promoting quality as well as yield which may be considered a remarkable
achievement and progress of agro-nanotechnology in the field of crop improvement
(Table 1).
3.2 Effect of Metal-Based Nanoparticles (MBNPs)
Different studies have been carried out to ascertain the effect of metal-based
nanoparticles (MBNPs) such as silver (Ag), copper (Cu), gold (Au), iron (Fe), and
molybdenum (Mo) on plants including wheat, maize, mung bean, mustard, spinach,
etc. Application of MBNPs has a profound effect on various growth parameters of
plants. They have been found to increase growth and physiological activities, water
and fertilizer use efficiency, germination of seeds, stimulate nodule formation, and
inhibit abscission of reproductive organs of plant. The use of silver nanoparticles
(SNPs) for crop improvement has been a topic of interest for researchers. SNPs
have variable responses in different plants and they affect plant growth by inducing
changes at physiological and molecular levels (Yan and Chen 2019). In a study, the
effect of soil applied SNPs at concentrations of 25–50 ppm on wheat plants showed
increased plant height and fresh and dry weights as compared to control. The expo-
sure of SNPs positively affected the number of seminal roots and at lower concen-
tration (25 ppm), it enhanced yield by increasing grain number/spike (Razzaq et al.
2016). Thus, sensible use of SNPs to soil can improve the yield of wheat; however,
further investigations need to be taken into consideration like concentration, mode
and time of application so as to realize the potential of SNPs in crop growth and
yield improvements for other plants in an ecofriendly manner. SNPs at 50 ppm con-
centration have been found to increase root fresh weight, total chlorophyll in mung
bean plants (Najafi and Jamei 2014). Similar effects of these nanoparticles have
been observed in case of Indian mustard seedlings wherein SNPs enhanced root and
shoot length, fresh weight, vigor index, and chlorophyll contents (Sharma et al.
2012). SNPs delay senescence as reported in mung bean where application of
100 μL of SNPs effectively suppressed oxidative stress-induced senescence
(Karuppanapandian et al. 2011). In another study, effects of different concentrations
(20, 40, 60, 80, and 100 ppm) of SNPs on various growth parameters in common
bean and maize was carried out and it was observed that at lower concentrations (20,
40, and 60 ppm), SNPs showed positive impact on the growth of both common bean
and maize plantlets, viz. increasing shoot and root lengths, leaf area, chlorophyll,
carbohydrate, and protein contents; however, at higher concentrations (80 and
Table 1 Application of ENPs of varying size at different concentrations on plants

Optimum
NPs concentration Plant Effects Reference
CNTs, MWCNTs, 50 and 200 μg/ Tomato Plant height and Khodakovskaya et al.
fullerols mL number of (2013)
Ag NPs flowers
47.2 nM Bitter melon Fruit yield Kole et al. (2013)
50 ppm Potato Weight and yield Tahmasbi et al. (2011)
of potato
mini-tubers
60 ppm Common Dry weight of Salama (2012)
bean, maize root and shoot
60 ppm Borage Seed yield Seif et al. (2011)
– Basil Seed yield Nejatzadeh-Barandozi
et al. (2014)
25–50 ppm Wheat Growth and Razzaq et al. (2016)
yield
Au NPs 10 ppm Indian Growth and seed Arora et al. (2012)
mustard yield
10 μg/mL Arabidopsis Root and shoot Kumar et al. (2013)
length, early
flowering
1000 μM Flame lily Vegetative Gopinath et al. (2014)
growth
Ti NPs 0.25% w/v Spinach Fresh and dry Yang et al. (2007)
weights
20 g/L Wheat Biomass and Jaberzadeh et al.
yield (2013)
Si, Pd, Au, and Cu 0.013 and Lettuce Shoot–root ratio Shah and Belozerova
NPs 0.066% w/w (2009)
Nanocrystalline Soybean Growth and crop Ngo et al. (2014)
powders (Fe, Co, yield
and Cu) Iron oxide 0.5–75 g/L Soybean Yield and quality Sheykhbaglou et al.
NPs (2010)
50 ppm Mung bean Biomass yield Dhoke et al. (2013)
0.04% w/v Wheat Grain yield, Bakhtiari et al. (2015)
spike weight,
protein content
300 ppm and Pea Growth and Al Sherbini et al.
He, Xe yield (2015)
irradiation
10 min
Nanoanatase-TiO2 0.25–4% Spinach Plant dry weight Zheng et al. (2005)
NPs (naturally
Nano-TiO2 Rutile aged)
(TiO2) 0.01 and 0.03% Maize Content of Morteza et al. (2013)
carotenoids and
anthocyanin
(continued)
70 J. M. War et al.
Table 1 (continued)
Optimum
NPs concentration Plant Effects Reference
ZnO NPs 20 ppm Mung bean Root and shoot Mahajan et al. (2011)
1 ppm Gram biomass
20 mg/L Tomato Growth and Panwar et al. (2012)
biomass
production
1000 ppm Peanut Stem and root Prasad et al. (2012)
growth, high
yield
500, 1000, Mung bean Dry weight Patra et al. (2013)
2000,
4000 ppm
1.5 ppm Chick pea Shoot and dry Burman et al. (2013)
weights
10–40 μg/mL Onion Seed yield Laware and Raskar
(2014)
50 mg Mung bean Biomass weight Jayarambabu et al.
(2015)
10 mg/L Cluster bean Shoot length, Raliya and Tarafdar
root area, and (2013)
plant biomass
Silicon dioxide 15 kg/ha Maize Growth and Yuvakumar et al.
NPs growth (2011)
parameters
– Tomato Antioxidant Haghighi et al. (2012)
system
– Squash Antioxidant Siddiqui and
system under Al-Whaibi (2014)
salt
Stress condition
CuO NPs 500 mg/kg Wheat Biomass Dimkpa et al. (2012)
30 ppm Wheat Growth and Hafeez et al. (2015)
yield
CeO2 NPs 2000 mg/L Maize, Shoot growth López-Moreno et al.
4000 mg/L alfalfa, and biomass (2010)
soybean
125, 250, Wheat Yield and Rico et al. (2014)
500 mg/kg soil nutritional
parameter
CaCO3 NPs – Mung bean Seedling growth Yugandhar and
and biomass Savithramma (2013)
100 ppm), they show inhibitory effect (Salama 2012). Besides SNPs, gold (Au)
nanoparticles are regarded as a promising tool in the field of crop improvement.
Au nanoparticles have long ago been used for delivery of genetic material in plant
cells. They have been reported to enhance seed yield by threefold over the control
in Arabidopsis at a concentration of 10 μg/ml (24 nm) (Kumar et al. 2013). In the

same study, Au NP treatment at 10 and 80 μg/ml concentrations showed increased
vegetative growth, seed germination, and free radical scavenging activity (Kumar
et al. 2013). In another report, the influence of gold NPs on yield of Indian mustard
was studied. Positive effect of Au NPs was visible on different growth parameters
such as plant height, stem diameter, number of branches, number of pods, and seed
yield. It was observed that average leaf area was not affected but there was an
increase in total number of leaves per plant. The increase in the yield of seeds and
reducing sugar and total sugar content was observed at concentrations of 10 ppm
and 25 ppm, respectively (Arora et al. 2012). In an endangered medicinal plant,
flame lily (Gloriosa superba), Au NPs showed positive impact on seed germination
and vegetative growth. Seed germination rate was enhanced by 39.67% (at 1000 μM
concentration) than control because of increased permeability for water and oxygen
and uptake of gold ions that interacted with embryo cells and stimulate the activity
of gibberellic acid (GA3) to release α-amylase enzyme in the aleurone cell layer
which then breaks down starch into simple sugar. A comprehensive effect on root
initiation, node elongation, and number of leaves was observed in seeds exposed to
1000 μM Au NPs. Increase in biomass and fresh weight by 2.40- and 5.18-fold was
observed, respectively, at 500 and 1000 μM concentrations of Au nanoparticles as
compared to control (Gopinath et al. 2014).
Applications of other metal-based nanoparticles such as Fe, Cu, and Mo have
been found to help in crop improvement by one way or the other. Iron (Fe) is one of
the important elements for plant growth and plays a key role in the photosynthetic
reactions. It helps in the activation of various enzymes that enhance photosystem
performance and contribute in RNA synthesis (Malakouti and Tehrani 2005). As
such, the effect of Fe NPs on spinach, grown in hydroponic solution, was investi-
gated which revealed increased plant growth and biomass due to remarkable
enhancement of Fe accumulation in leaves, stem, and root by 11- to 21-fold
(Almeelbi and Bezbaruah 2012). Essential oil percentage and flower yield of pot
marigold (Calendula officinalis) were reported to increase on application of Fe NPs
(1 g/L) at the stem elongation stage (Amuamuha et al. 2012). Similarly, copper (Cu)
nanoparticles were examined for their beneficial role in enhancing wheat growth
and yield. Different concentrations (10, 20, 30, 40, and 50 ppm), respond well
towards increase in growth and yield of wheat plant; however, at 30 ppm concentra-
tion of Cu NPs, there was significant increase in leaf area, chlorophyll content,
number of spikes/pot, number of grains/spike, 100-grain weight, and grain yield
(Hafeez et al. 2015). These results conclude concentration-dependent enhancement
of growth and yield in wheat plants, hence further research is needed to optimize
dose and mode of application to maximize yield production. Similarly, colloidal
solution of molybdenum nanoparticles (Mo NPs) (8 mg/L) in the rhizosphere of
chickpea (Cicer arietinum) has been reported to stimulate the development of agro-
nomically valuable microflora that resulted in increase in number of nodules/plant
by twofold as compared to control (Taran et al. 2014).
72 J. M. War et al.
3.3 Effect of Metal Oxide Nanoparticles on Plants
Nanoparticles of metal oxides such as ZnO, TiO2, Fe2O3, CeO2, and SiO2 have been
used for crop improvement in various plants. They have a significant potential to
improve seed germination, plant growth, and yield (Razzaq et al. 2016). However,
their effect varies depending upon the dosage or concentration of the nanoparticle
used. For example, ZnO NPs enhance root elongation in soybean at lower concen-
tration (500 mg/L), but at the same time it shows inhibitory effect at higher concen-
trations (4000 mg/L) and hence reduces the root length (López-Moreno et al. 2010).
Similarly, ZnO NPs showed concentration-dependent growth pattern in chickpea
and mung bean seedlings. Maximum growth in case of mung bean was observed at
20 ppm, while for chickpea seedlings, the maximum growth occurred at 1 ppm
concentration (Mahajan et al. 2011). ZnO nanoparticles have been proved much
more beneficial for growth, flowering, and seed productivity in onion plants (Laware
and Raskar 2014). Exposure of different concentrations (0, 10, 20, 30, and 40 μg/
mL) of ZnO NPs was given to 6-month-aged onion bulbs and the treatment was
given three times at the interval of 15 days and different growth parameters were
assessed both at flowering as well as at the time of harvest. It was observed that
plants treated with ZnO NPs at the concentrations of 20 and 30 μg/ml showed sig-
nificant growth and flowered 12–14 days earlier in comparison with control.
Moreover, a remarkable enhancement in yield was obtained due to production of
high-quality and healthy seeds. ZnO nanoparticles have also been used to enhance
nutritional quality and growth of leaves in spinach. Application of 500 and 1000 ppm
ZnO nanoparticle has increased leaf length, width, surface area, and color of spin-
ach leaves as compared to control. At the same concentration, elevated levels of
protein and dietary fiber contents were observed (Kisan et al. 2015). In another
study, chlorophyll formation, photosynthesis, and plant dry weight of spinach were
enhanced by the application of TiO2 nanoparticles (Hong et al. 2005). Thus, there is
the possibility of using nanoparticles of ZnO and TiO2 as biofortification agents so
as to improve protein and dietary fiber contents of spinach leaves to reduce malnu-
trition. Feizi et al. (2013) reported that application of nano-sized TiO2 at 60 ppm
concentration increases seed germination in Foeniculum species. In Zea mays,
nano-TiO2 plays a significant role in increasing pigments when sprayed at reproduc-
tive stage which finally led to increase in yield (Morteza et al. 2013). Application of
TiO2 NPs exhibited positive response on regeneration efficiency in aromatic rice
(cultivar KDML105) (Zahra et al. 2017).
The effects of iron oxide (Fe2O3) nanoparticles have been studied in peanut and
it was demonstrated that application of nano-Fe2O3 significantly increased nutrient
absorption that resulted in enhanced growth and photosynthesis (Liu et al. 2005).
Similarly, exposure of nano-Fe2O3 (0.5 g/L) increased yield in soybean due to
increase in leaf and pod dry weight (Sheykhbaglou et al. 2010). The application of
Fe2O3 NPs on soybean via foliar and soil route had different effects. Enhancement
in root elongation and photosynthetic potential were remarkably higher by foliar
spray as compared to soil route probably due to accumulation of iron ions (Alidoust
and Isoda 2013). However, nanoparticles vary in their effects depending upon mode
of application, concentration as well as the type of plant species. Soil treatment of

CuO NPs was given to mustard (Brassica juncea) to demonstrate their effect on
photosynthetic rate and antioxidant levels. CuO NPs at different concentrations (2,
4, 8, 16 ppm) significantly increase the photosynthetic efficiency and antioxidant
levels, but the optimum levels were achieved at 4 ppm NP concentration (Singh
et al. 2018).
The impacts of cerium oxide nanoparticles (CeO2 NPs) on Coriandrum sativum
plants grown in organic soil were assessed. After the treatment with 0–500 mg/kg
CeO2 NPs, plants were analyzed for their growth and biochemical assays and the
results revealed significant effects at 125 mg/kg concentration of CeO2 NPs, includ-
ing increased root and shoot length, enhanced biomass and activity of catalase in
shoots, and ascorbate peroxidase in roots (Morales et al. 2013). Similarly, effect of
CeO2 NPs (0, 125, 250, and 500 mg/kg) on agronomic traits, yield, and nutritional
parameters in wheat showed positive response and there was overall enhancement
of growth, biomass and yield production. Besides, the composition of nutrients like
amino acids was effectively changed and there was an increase in the amount of
linolenic acids by 6.17% as compared to control (Rico et al. 2014). All these find-
ings suggest the potential of CeO2 NPs to modify crop physiology and food quality
and hence demonstrate the fertilizing effects in wheat. Extended period for spike
formation and physiological maturity has also been reported in wheat (Li et al.
2011; Marchiol et al. 2016).
The effect of SiO2 nanoparticles on seed germination of tomato was investigated
and it was observed that seed germination percentage, germination index, vigor
index, seedling fresh weight and dry weight were significantly elevated on exposure
to SiO2 NPs. These findings offer a great scope to understand the mechanism of
interaction between plants and nano-silica, since nano-SiO2 may be used as a fertil-
izer for crop improvement (Siddiqui and Al-Whaibi 2014). Liu et al. (2016) reported
that engineered NPs are not always more toxic than other chemicals comprising the
same elements.
3.4 ole of Nanotechnology for Enhancement

R
of Secondary Metabolites
Secondary metabolites are natural plant products (phytochemicals) responsible for

medicinal properties of plants. A number of secondary metabolites are potential
sources of nutraceuticals, pharmaceuticals, and agrochemicals. However, these sec-
ondary metabolites are produced in very low amounts by plants (Kabera et al. 2014).
In order to enhance the production of important metabolites in plants, nanotechno-
logical approach has been applied to a larger extent to achieve the same.
Nanotechnology plays a vital role to enhance the secondary metabolite production
due to their novel and unique properties as reported by Giraldo et al. (2014).
Engineered nanoparticles have been used to deliver DNA and chemicals into plant
74 J. M. War et al.
cells (Galbraith 2007; Torney et al. 2007). Application of nanoparticles for enhance-
ment of secondary metabolite production has been carried out under both in vivo
and in vitro conditions. In the former, there is direct usage of nanoparticles in a
precise concentration either by foliar spray or treatment with seeds or soil. Whereas
in the latter case, nanoparticles have been used as elicitors for enhancing the expres-
sion level of genes related to the production of secondary metabolites (Isah 2019).
Much of the work has been done to realize the effect of nanoparticles as elicitors for
secondary metabolite production under in vitro conditions. However, there are
many reports regarding the enhancement of secondary metabolites through in vivo
nanotreatments. For example, foliar application of nano-iron (Fe NP) had signifi-
cant effect on the production of essential oil content in pot marigold. Fe NPs (0, 1,
2, and 3 g/L) were sprayed at different stages and the effect on yield of essential oil
was highly remarkable at first harvest. Highest percentage (1.573%) of essential oil
was achieved when spraying at early stage (stem initialized) that led to the maxi-
mum yield of essential oil (2.397 kg/ha) in the flower (López-Moreno et al. 2010).
Similarly, application of ZnO NPs improved gum content and its viscosity in cluster
bean when 14-day-old plant was foliar-sprayed with NP concentration of 10 mg/L
(Raliya and Tarafdar 2013). Likewise, the impact of fullerol [C60(OH)20] signifi-
cantly increased phytomedicinal content in exposed bitter melon (Momordica
charantia) fruits. There was an increase in the levels of both anticancer, including
cucurbitacin-B and lycopene by 74 and 82%, and antidiabetic compounds, includ-
ing charantin and insulin by 20 and 91%, respectively (Kole et al. 2013). Generally,
plants produce secondary metabolites when exposed to different inducer molecules
or elicitors (Zhao et al. 2005a, b). Nanoparticles are potentially effective and novel
elicitors that have been used in plant biotechnology to enhance production of sec-
ondary metabolites (Fakruddin et al. 2012). Given below are the examples of sec-
ondary metabolites that have been significantly influenced by the application of
nanoparticles under in vitro conditions.
Terpenoids
Artemisinin, a sesquiterpene lactone, is one of the important secondary metabolites

produced by Artemisia annua. This secondary metabolite is used against malarial
parasite (Plasmodium falciparum and P. vivax) (Snow et al. 2005) for treating vari-
ous cancers including breast cancer, colon cancer, leukemia, and small carcinomas
in lungs (Lei et al. 2011). However, production of artemisinin by A. annua is not
sufficient to fulfill the demand. In this regard, application of nanoparticles has been
reported as potential elicitors for the production of plant secondary metabolites. For
example, nanosilver particles have been reported to act as potential elicitors and the
exposure of Ag-SiO2 core–shell nanoparticles (Ag NPs) in hairy root cultures of
A. annua resulted in increased artemisinin content (Zhang et al. 2013). Similarly,
nanocobalt particles were used in cell suspension cultures of A. annua for the elici-
tation of artemisinin. At the same time, the expression levels of SQS and DBR2
genes and artemisinin content were quantified using qRT-PCR and HPLC
techniques, respectively. Different concentrations of nanocobalt (0.25, 2.5, and

5 mg/L) were used in the study and the cultures were regularly analyzed after 8, 24,
48, and 72 h and it was observed that artemisinin content was highest at 5 mg/L
nanocobalt for 24 h at which expression levels of SQS and DBR2 genes were
declined (Ghasemi et al. 2015). Similar type of study was carried out in hairy root
culture of A. vulgaris to see the effect of nanocobalt and nanozinc (0, 0.25, 0.5, and
1 mg/L) on the expression levels of SQS, DBR2, ADS, and ALDH1 genes (Yarizade
and Hosseini 2015). It was revealed that both nanocobalt and nanozinc maximized
the expression levels of all the genes under investigation at 0.25 mg/L and 1.0 mg/L,
respectively. However, it was suggested that nanocobalt is more effective elicitor
than nanozinc because concurrent to the increase in the ADS upregulation, it also
leads to downregulation of antagonist SQS gene.
Phenols
Aloin is one of the important secondary metabolites derived from Aloe vera that
possesses antimicrobial and medicinal property, and is used to treat skin burns, cuta-
neous injuries, and ulcers. Cell suspension cultures of Aloe vera were treated with
different elicitors (nano-Ag, nano-TiO2, NH4NO3, and sucrose) to investigate their
effects on aloin production after analyzing cultures at 6 h, 24 h, 48 h, 72 h, and
168 h. It was observed that elicitation by Ag NPs effectively enhanced aloin content
at 48 h after which it declined and reached the control level. Same thing happened
when nano-TiO2 was used as elicitor and it was suggested that the decline in aloin
production after 48 h might be due to feedback inhibition of increased aloin or NP
on gene expression (Raei et al. 2014). Despite this fact, Ag NPs are still considered
as potential elicitors for the production of some important secondary metabolites.
Biologically synthesized Ag NPs had been shown to increase total phenol content in
Bacopa monnieri when these plants are grown in hydroponic solution. This enhance-
ment effect is due to slight stress on the growth and metabolism of B. monnieri by
Ag NPs (Krishnaraj et al. 2012).
Flavonoids
Flavonoids and isoflavonoids are among the important groups of secondary metabo-
lites in plants. Many legume plants are rich sources of these secondary metabolites
(Heiras-Palazuelos et al. 2013). Impact of TiO2 NPs (0.5, 1.5, 3, 4.5, and 6 mg/L) on
the production of secondary metabolites (phenolic and flavonoid compounds) were
studied in gram under in vitro conditions. Estimation of secondary metabolites from
callus was done by HPLC and then compared with the mother plant. It was found
that TiO2 NPs significantly increased secondary metabolites in callus embryo of
gram at the concentrations of 4.5 and 6.0 mg/L (Al-Oubaidi and Kasid 2015).
Similarly, Au and Cu NPs have also been reported to enhance the production of
phenolics and flavonoids in milk thistle plants (Khan et al. 2016).
76 J. M. War et al.
Polyketides
Hypericum perforatum is a well-known medicinal plant and its extract is used

against mild-to-moderate depression (Dias et al. 1998). The applications of Fe- and
Zn-nano oxides have been used as elicitors to promote the production of two impor-
tant polyketides, hypericin and hyperforin, present in Hypericum perforatum
(Sharafi et al. 2013). Various concentrations of iron- and zinc-nano oxides (0, 50,
100, and 150 ppb) were used during the treatment, and cell suspension cultures were
analyzed after 72 h. It was observed that both the nanoparticles significantly
increased the production of hypericin and hyperforin at 100 ppb concentration. The
contents of hypericin and hyperforin reached to the maximum (7.87 and 217.45 μg/g
dry weight, respectively) by nano-zinc oxide, i.e., 3- and 13-fold higher than the
control, while as it increased from 2.07 and 16.27 μg/g dry weight to 11.18 and
195.62 μg/g dry weight by nano-iron oxide.
Phenyl Propanoids and Terpenoids
Fennel is an annual or biennial aromatic plant which is used for the preparation of
herbal drugs. Major components of fennel oil include phenyl propanoids and terpe-
noids. The amount of trans-anethole compound is the deciding factor for the quality
of fennel volatile oil (Chaouche et al. 2011). Phytochemical analysis of normal and
nanoelicited (TiO2 and SiO2) in vitro grown fennel plantlets was carried out and
there was a significant difference between the two (Bahreini et al. 2015). Normal
plants contain anethole, fenchone, limonene, and decane. However, it was observed
that TiO2-elicited plant extract contains phytol, octane, dodecane, and phenol 2, 4
bis (1, 1 dimethylethyl), while the constituents in SiO2-elicited plants include ben-
zoic acid, jasmonic acid, and hexadecanoic acid and pyrrolidinone as the major
metabolites. All these differences in the chemical composition are due to the elicita-
tion or induction by TiO2 and SiO2 nanoparticles. The metabolites like phytol and
benzoic acid which appeared by elicitation process can be used as industrial and
pharmaceutical precursors.
4 rop Growth Enhancement Due to Nano-Enabled

C
Disease Suppression
Diseases represent one of the major factors in limiting crop productivity. Annual
agricultural crop losses due to plant diseases account for billions of dollars in the
United States alone (USDA). In order to control fungal pathogens, cost over fungi-
cide applications exceeds $600 million per year (González-Melendi et al. 2008).
Disease causing organisms in plants include viruses, bacteria, fungi, and nematodes
whose infection leads to economic loss by reducing yield, product quality, and/or
shelf life. These economic losses may prove to be of secondary concern on agricul-
tural productivity in addition to increasing global population and changing climate.
Therefore, innovative and novel techniques are critically needed for crop disease
management that will be a central component to any long-term strategy for sustain-
ing agricultural production. Among the various strategies, the use of nanotechnol-
ogy is currently considered as a promising and effective method for control of plant
pathogens or phytopathogens. The active ingredients of traditional pesticides and
fertilizers often have low water solubility due to which availability to targeted crops
can be quite low and larger quantities of these formulations are required to control
pathogens effectively to attain a good yield. In addition, fertilizers and metal-based
pesticide formulations currently in practice are prone to leaching, precipitation, and
volatilization. All this results in a highly expensive and inefficient approach towards
pathogen control and plant fertilization (Servin et al. 2015). In comparison to this,
nanofertilizers could offer more controlled release of nutrients and that too in a
coordinated way so as to harmonize in regard to time with the uptake by the devel-
oping crop. This approach would both increase nutrient availability and minimize
wasteful interactions with soil or air that result in loss of nutrients from the agricul-
tural system. The application and production of nanoenabled pesticides and fertil-
izers is proceeding at a rapid pace because of their greater solubility, stabilized
dispersal, decreased persistence, and greater target specificity (Rai et al. 2012;
Pirzadah et al. 2019).
There are numerous reports showing positive impacts of metal and metal oxide
nanoparticles on crop growth and/or pathogen inhibition. Nanoparticles such as Ag,
Si, ZnO, Mg, and TiO2 possess antimicrobial activity and likely suppress crop dis-
eases directly (Prasad et al. 2014). Silver nanoparticles (Ag NPs) exhibit a strong
inhibitory activity against various microorganisms due to which their application
has gained a significant research for management of phytopathogens. For example,
application of Ag NPs at 200 mg/L concentration reduces colony formation of
pathogenic fungi that causes diseases in rye grass (Lolium perenne) to about 50%
(Jo et al. 2009). These nanoparticles had been used in field trials where they inhib-
ited the activity of Colletotrichum spp. (anthracnose pathogen) (Lamsal et al. 2011).
Similarly, the combined effect of Ag NPs and fungicide fluconazole has been
reported to exhibit greatest antifungal activity against several pathogenic fungi
including Candida albicans, Phoma glomerata, and Trichoderma sp. (Gajbhiye
et al. 2009). It has been shown that Ag ions bind to plasma membrane proteins con-
taining cysteine amino acids, damaging its membrane integrity that causes change
in physiological and biochemical processes of a cell. Subsequent penetration of Ag
into cell cytoplasm causes inactivation of important enzymes and finally cell death
(Ocsoy et al. 2013). ZnO NPs effectively reduce the growth of Fusarium gra-
minearum, a pathogenic fungus in mung bean, by about 26% when compared to
bulk oxide and controls (Dimkpa et al. 2013). These nanoparticles have also been
reported to work against Botrytis cinerea and Penicillium expansum, reducing their
growth by 63–80% and 61–91%, respectively. ZnO NPs function by cellular disrup-
tion in both the pathogens, leading to hyphal malformation and ultimately fungal
death (He et al. 2011). A high inhibition rate in germination was found in the fungal
78 J. M. War et al.
spores of Rhizopus stolonifer, Fusarium oxysporum, Alternaria alternata, and

Mucor plumbeus on exposure to ZnO and MgO NPs at concentrations as low as
100 mg/L (Wani and Shah 2012). The pathogenic bacteria, Pseudomonas aerugi-
nosa, and fungi, A. flavus, were effectively suppressed when exposed to biosynthe-
sized ZnO NPs (Jayaseelan et al. 2012).
Metal oxide nanoparticles such as TiO2 have also shown a positive impact in
various agricultural amendments due to their antimicrobial and photo-catalytic attri-
butes. They could increase crop yield by 30% and also reduce pathogenic diseases
effectively (Chao and Choi 2005). In a field study, application of TiO2 NPs showed
reduced infection of P. syringae pv. lachrymans and P. cubensis in cucumber by 69
and 91%, respectively (Cui et al. 2009). TiO2 NPs could efficiently control bacterial
spot disease, caused by Xanthomonas sp., in tomato and roses (Paret et al. 2013a, b).
The use of TiO2 NPs (up to 1% of the product mass) in food products has been
approved by FDA because it is harmless and nontoxic (Ahmad and Rasool 2014).
Similarly, application of Cu nanoparticles was found to be more effective than
non-nano Cu formulations against Phytophthora infestans in tomato plants. In a
field study, nano- and non-nano Cu formulations controlled the growth of the patho-
gen by 73.5% and 57.8%, respectively (Giannousi et al. 2013). Conversely, chemi-
cally synthesized Cu nanoparticle showed highly effective and promising antifungal
activity against other pathogens such as Phoma destructiva, Fusarium oxysporum,
Alternaria alternata, and Curvularia lunata (Kanhed et al. 2014). Moreover, Cu
NPs have been found to exhibit higher fungal inhibition potential than commer-
cially available fungicide bavistin. Nanoparticle-mediated enhancement of crop
growth and yield may simply be the result of reduced disease persistence which
may be either due to anti-pathogenic activity of nanoparticle itself or by the induc-
tion of key defensive metabolites or pathways within the plant through nanoparti-
cles. However, many of the nanoscale amendments discussed above entangle
micronutrient elements, thus the combination of pathogen suppression and enhanced
plant nutritional status may in fact be the reason for enhanced crop growth and yield
(Servin et al. 2015).
5 ngineered Nanoparticles (ENPs) as Magic Bullets

E
for Smart Delivery System
Engineered nanoparticles (nonmetal, metal, and metal oxide nanoparticles) possess

unusual physicochemical attributes (e.g., small surface area, a typical surface struc-
ture, enhanced reactivity, etc.) that separate them from those of their molecular and
bulk counterparts. These attributes are the consequences of small size, shape, sur-
face structure, chemical composition, stability, and agglomeration of the nanopar-
ticles (NPs) (Nel et al. 2006). Due to these unique features, ENPs have been applied
in a range of consumer and commercial products such as catalysts, semiconductors,
microelectronics, domestic products (e.g., sunscreens and cosmetics), and for drug
delivery. Their immense uses in nanomedicine and nanopharmacology have made
them as smart delivery systems. These systems have the ability to detect the effects
of chemicals, pharmaceuticals, nutrients, food supplements, insecticides, fungi-
cides, vaccinations, bioactive compounds, probiotics, etc., once after their delivery.
In case of crop improvement, target-specific and controlled delivery of various
chemicals, fertilizers, pesticides, and nutrients will certainly reduce applications of
plant protection products, decrease nutrient losses from fertilizers, and increase
yields through optimized nutrient management. Engineered NPs would reduce phy-
totoxicity and will allow controlled release of various agrochemicals “on demand”
or “on command” basis.
5.1 Delivery of Pesticides
Pest management has become a challenging program in today’s agriculture because

of weak diagnosis of pest occurrence, resistance against pesticides, inefficacy and
spray drift of pesticides, and emergence of new pests. Thus, controlled or smart
delivery system is necessary for targeted application of pesticides in order to release
required agrochemicals in sufficient amounts over a period of time to achieve maxi-
mum biological efficacy and to minimize the harmful effects (Tsuji 2001). The
approach of nanotechnology will be helpful to overcome these problems. It is
because of the unique features of nanoparticles like increased surface area, greater
solubility, higher mobility, induction of systemic activity, and lower toxicity. These
features will help to enhance the efficacy of conventional pesticides and other agro-
chemicals (Sasson et al. 2007). The normal spray of pesticide application includes
low value preparation and high volume agrochemicals, but in nanotechnology-
based preparations, low volume and high value chemicals are used (Ghormade et al.
2011). Nanomaterials like clay, silica capsules, and polymeric particles are known
for their controlled release properties as well as their biocompatibility, biodegrad-
ability, and reduced toxicity behaviors due to which they are being used as smart
delivery systems for various agrochemicals (Choy et al. 2007; Hussein et al. 2002).
Similarly, montmorillonite (MMT), a swelling type clay, hydrophilic, and having
cationic exchange capacity, can be modified with cationic surfactant to make them
hydrophobic (de Paiva et al. 2008) and then encapsulating different types of pesti-
cides in both hydrophilic (Mishael et al. 2002) and hydrophobic MMT clays (Celis
et al. 2005). It has been shown that the efficiency of the chlorpyrifos and diazinon
insecticides improved from 4 weeks (commercial formulation) to as high as
20 weeks (using MMT clay) (Choudary et al. 1989). Several polymeric nanoparti-
cles have been designed for effective release of agrochemicals, viz. encapsulation of
bifenthrin by using polymers such as poly (acrylic acid)-b-poly (butyl acrylate) and
polyvinyl alcohol (PVOH) (Liu et al. 2008a). Mesoporous silica NPs (MSNPs) have
been used in agricultural sector in order to encapsulate and deliver agrochemicals in
a controlled manner. MSNPs are designed to carry pesticide (e.g., avermectin) into
its core, which beshield the pesticide from photodegradation and at the same time
allowing for its sustained release (Li et al. 2007). MSNPs have also been applied
80 J. M. War et al.
against biotic stress of plants caused by insects mainly through physioabsorption of

cuticular lipids, resulting damage to their waxy protective coat and subsequent
death by dehydration (Barik et al. 2008) as in case of rice weevil Sitophilus oryzae
(Debnath et al. 2011). The use of porous hollow silica nanoparticles (PHSNP) with
a loading capacity of 36% proved much more effective and beneficial for controlled
and sustained release of water-soluble pesticide called validamycin. After encapsu-
lation in PHSNP, the release of validamycin lasts for 800 min as opposed to instan-
taneous release of free validamycin (Liu et al. 2006).
In addition to pesticide coating technology, nanoemulsion is another potential
technique for slow and controlled delivery of pesticides or their active ingredients
because of their efficient kinetic stability, smaller size, optical transparency, and
lower viscosity (Xu et al. 2010). Nanoemulsion increases both solubility and bio-
availability of nanopesticides, spreads it effectively on plant leaves, and enhances
internalization in insects (Ebert et al. 1999). The neem oil nanoemulsions have been
reported to have increased larvicidal effect with decreasing droplet size (Anjali
et al. 2012). Nanoemulsions highly enhanced the stability of water-insoluble pesti-
cide, cypermethrin, and resist its precipitation when diluted from concentrated solu-
tion (Wang et al. 2007). Development of new nanoscale formulations of pesticides
has gained great attention nowadays and the research is being conducted by many
agrochemical firms of the world. BASF—world’s fourth ranking agrochemical
Corporation (Germany) has applied for a patent on pesticide formulation, wherein
the active ingredient ranges in size from 10 to 150 nm. Similarly, Bayer Crop
Science of Germany has applied a patent for the development of nanoemulsion
concentrate, containing nanoscale droplets in the range of 10–400 nm as the active
ingredient. Two nanoemulsion products, i.e., Primo MAXX (plant growth regula-
tor) and Banner MAXX (fungicide), had already been developed by Syngenta
Company, with average particle size of 100 nm (Chinnamuthu and Boopathi 2009).
5.2 Delivery of Fertilizers
Agricultural production and crop quality largely depend upon plant nutrition. Nearly
40–60% of the total world food production is achieved by maintaining nutritional
status via application of fertilizers (Roberts 2009). Fertilizers play a key role for the
improvement of agricultural production; however, the nutrient use efficiency of nor-
mally used fertilizers is still very low and a large quantity goes waste due to runoff,
leaching, denitrification, fixation, and microbial immobilization. There is a huge
percentage of nutrient loss from the fertilizers to the environment and hence cannot
be absorbed by plants. In general, nearly 40–70% nitrogen, 80–90% phosphorus,
and 50–70% potassium are lost to the surroundings causing economy and resource
losses as well as serious environmental pollution (Wu and Liu 2008). To overcome
these problems, application of nano-based fertilizers is an advanced approach of
nanotechnology that will revolutionize the fertilizer industries in near future. These
fertilizers have been developed by using nanoencapsulation technique so as to allow
slow and controlled release of nutrients to plants. This controlled release will reduce
loss of nutrients to the surroundings and also enhance nutrient use efficiency
(Abobatta 2018). Ideally, nanofertilizers release nutrients in accordance with the
demand of plants. This timely release does not allow premature conversion of nutri-
ents to chemical and/or gaseous forms which remain unavailable to plants (e.g.,
volatilization of NH3 from urea) (DeRosa et al. 2010). Nanofertilizers are also
called as smart fertilizers because of their smart delivery system. Slow-release fer-
tilizers have advantage over soluble fertilizers as they can reduce the application
rate and frequency by releasing their nutrients slowly and in accordance with the
requirement of the plant. Due to large surface area to volume ratio, nanomaterials
could effectively retain nutrients, thereby serving as a longer term and more stable
nutrient reservoir to plants (Navarro et al. 2008). Wu and Liu (2008) reported a
slow-release double-coated NPK fertilizer having high water retention and superab-
sorbent capacity by cross-linked poly(acrylic acid)/diatomite containing urea, chi-
tosan, and water-soluble granular fertilizer NPK as outer coating, inner coating, and
the core, respectively. This fertilizer with higher water retention capacity and con-
trolled delivery system of nutrients is nontoxic and environment-friendly and hence
could be immensely useful in agricultural and horticultural applications. Similarly,
chitosan along with methacrylic acid (MAA) nanoparticles has been used for incor-
poration of NPK fertilizer sources such as urea, calcium phosphate, and potassium
chloride for controlled release of nitrogen, phosphorus, and potassium nutrients
(Corradini 2010). Nanocoating of sulfur (≤100 nm layer) has been used for encap-
sulation of urea and phosphorus fertilizers for their slow and controlled release,
with additional benefit of sulfur especially for sulfur deficient soils (Brady and Weil
1999). Increased stability on coating reduces the rate of dissolution of fertilizer and
allows its slow and sustained release. Synthetic apatite nanoparticles have been used
as a novel type of phosphorus (P) fertilizer for plants because of their slow and sus-
tained release of phosphorus, thereby decreasing risk of water eutrophication (Liu
and Lal 2014).
5.3 Delivery of Bioactive Molecules
Engineered nanoparticles (ENPs) are a source of new vector for the delivery of
bioactive molecules including proteins, nucleotides, and activators. The employ-
ment of mesoporous silica NPs (MSNPs) has gained a special interest to deliver
DNA and its activator into isolated cells of plants and even in intact leaves of tobacco
(Torney et al. 2007). A honeycomb-like MSNP system (3 nm pore size) was armed
with a gene (GFP gene) and its chemical inducer, with the ends of MSNPs covered
with gold (Au) nanoparticles. An uncapping trigger was applied to break the bond
interaction between Au NPs and MSNPs after their entry into the cells, resulting in
the release of biomolecules followed by gene expression. MSNPs can also deliver
proteins or enzymes into plant cells, thereby enabling their transient presence that
may be used for genome modifications and biochemical analysis (Martin-Ortigosa
82 J. M. War et al.
et al. 2014). As such, lengthy process of DNA transgenics can be avoided and modi-
fied traits can be directly transferred into future generations. In addition to MSNPs,
other nanoparticles are also used for the delivery of bioactive molecules into plant
cells including single- or multi-walled carbon nanotubes (SWCNTs or MWCNTs)
(Liu et al. 2009; Serag et al. 2011), quantum dots (QDs) (Etxeberria et al. 2006),
magnetic virus-like NPs (VNPs) (Huang et al. 2011), Au NPs (Wu et al. 2011;
Martin-Ortigosa et al. 2012), and starch NPs (Liu et al. 2008b). As compared to
conventional methods of gene delivery, nanoparticle-mediated delivery systems
have several benefits. They are highly efficient with ease of operation. For example,
the amount of DNA required for detection of expression via nanoparticle methods
is 1000 times lower than that required for conventional methods (Torney et al.
2007). Nano-based delivery system makes possible the transient DNA-free genome
editing of plants via direct transfer of biomolecules in a controlled fashion (includ-
ing gene silencing), leading to production of modified nontransgenic plants which
differs from conventional genetic engineering methods. Nanoparticle-mediated
delivery system has the potential to deliver more than one biomolecules simultane-
ously to the target cell, for example, DNA and proteins (Martin-Ortigosa et al.
2012), DNA and its activator (Torney et al. 2007), or even different genes. Moreover,
ENPs can be easily armed with biological molecules through their surface function-
alization for specific and targeted delivery.
5.4 Nanoherbicides: Novel Chemicals to Suppress Weeds
Weeds have always been one of the main reasons for reduction in crop productivity.
Continuous exposure of plant community to different herbicides in different seasons
has led to herbicide resistance in plants and becomes uncontrollable through chemi-
cals. Target-specific herbicide molecules have been developed by virtue of nanopar-
ticle encapsulation techniques and are aimed at specific receptors in the roots of
target weeds which after translocation inhibit glycolysis and make the weed to
starve for food and get killed (Chinnamuthu and Kokiladevi 2007). Application of
herbicides in rainfed areas having insufficient soil moisture may lead to loss as
vapor. Thus, herbicides cannot be applied in advance anticipating rainfall in these
areas. However, nanoparticle-based herbicides may prove to be much more benefi-
cial under all these circumstances. NP-based herbicides control parasitic weeds
effectively at lower doses, thus reducing chances of adverse effects on the crops
(Goldwasser et al. 2003). The release of active components from nano-based herbi-
cides is pre-programmed as they have been encapsulated by using nanoparticles and
hence can be trigged under certain conditions within the parasitic weed. Adjuvants
for herbicide application are currently available that include nanomaterials. In
one study, alginate/chitosan nanoparticles were prepared and used as a vector for
paraquat herbicide (Silva et al. 2011). The release profiles of free paraquat and
paraquat associated with alginate/chitosan nanoparticles showed significant differ-
ences during the observation. The herbicide in association with alginate/chitosan
nanoparticles revealed changes in release profile as well as its interaction with the
soil. It was suggested that this system may prove to be an effective means of reduc-
ing negative impacts caused by paraquat. Besides, it was also observed that soil
sorption of paraquat in both free and associated case was dependent on the amount
of organic matter.
5.5 Precision Farming
Precision farming is an innovative approach of nanotechnology that has potential to

revolutionize agriculture, in particular, to increase the crop productivity by applying
inputs on time and in preciously required quantity (Scott and Chen 2013). This
approach has long been felt to minimize inputs (fertilizers, pesticides, herbicides,
etc.) while maximizing the output (crop yields) by sensing environmental variables
and reducing agricultural waste, thereby keeping environmental pollution to a mini-
mum (Chinnamuthu and Boopathi 2009). Precision farming uses nanosensors and
monitoring devices that are enabled by nanotechnology and will have a large impact
on future farming methodologies. These sensors are autonomous and linked to the
global positioning system (GPS) system. Networks of such wireless nanosensors
are positioned across cultivated fields, providing essential data and leading to the
best agronomic intelligence processes, the main objective of which is to minimize
application of inputs and maximizing output (Scott and Chen 2013). The informa-
tion and signals provided by nanosensors include ideal timing for planting and har-
vesting crops, their need for water, fertilizers, pesticides, herbicides, and other
treatments on time and at appropriate level under given plant physiology, pathology,
and environmental conditions. Nanosensors are impregnated with nanoparticles
which determine the nutrient status and deficiency of the plants and provide timely
corrective measures to reduce the both yield and quality loss. Valid information
about the crop growth and field conditions including temperature, moisture, pH, soil
fertility, nutrient status, insects, weeds, etc. can be determined on time and better
decisions can be made regarding the enhancement of crop productivity (Kumar
2011). Timely detection of pests helps to solve the problem of pest damage in crops
by combining with significant diagnosis of insects, fungal, bacterial, or viral patho-
gens. By diagnosing pests and pesticide residues, farmers and food manufacturers
may assure product quality and safety before its dispatch (Grunert 2005) (Fig. 2).
6 Influence of Soil on Nanoparticle Activity
The activity of nanoparticles is highly influenced by the physical and chemical

characteristics of the surrounding environment. The interaction of nanoparticles
with biotic and abiotic soil components will certainly have an effect on their initial
properties which will subsequently influence nanoparticle stability, transport,
84 J. M. War et al.
Fig. 2 Schematic representation of precision agriculture cycle
aggregation, and availability to biota. For example, Ag NPs shows greater mobility
in negatively charged soils that will have a long-term impact on transport potential
of NPs. The addition of stabilizing agents such as sodium citrate, sugars, polyvinyl
pyrrolidone, amines, and amides significantly changed the interaction of NPs with
soil and influenced its resulting mobility (Tolaymat et al. 2010). Sulfidation of Ag
NPs occurs under both oxic and anoxic conditions and the transformed particles
exhibit different mobility and activity (Thalmann et al. 2014). Interestingly, the
effect of humic acid, a common soil component, has been reported to completely
alleviate graphene phytotoxicity in wheat grown in hydroponic solution (Hu et al.
2014) and also increased the mobility of Ag nanoparticles (Tian et al. 2010). In the
rhizosphere of cowpea, a rapid dissolution of ZnO NPs was found prior to uptake of
ionic Zn into plant tissues (Wang et al. 2013). Soil pH is one of the important factors
that determine the availability of nutrients to plants. For example, as soil pH
approaches 7.0, nutrients like Cu, Fe, Mn, and Zn become progressively less avail-
able which results in low uptake by crop roots and hence compromised nutritional
status (Sims 1986). Therefore, efficacious soil-based nanoscale supplements will
need to consider physicochemical properties of soil such as pH. In a study, wheat
was grown in acidic and alkaline soils amended with ZnO NPs and it was observed
that there was a 200-fold higher soluble Zn content in the acidic soil as compared to
the alkaline soil. Moreover, a tenfold higher concentration of soluble Zn content

was found in wheat shoots when grown in acidic soil (Watson et al. 2015). High
accumulation of Zn (344.07 mg/kg) was observed in case of soybean leaves when
exposed to ZnO NPs. The aggregation and stability of ZnO NPs is highly affected
by soil components such as organic matter (Priester et al. 2012).
7 Nanotoxicology and Regulatory Perspectives
Nanotechnology is a novel approach that has tremendous potential in the agricul-

tural sector with its long lasting and beneficial influences. However, the increasing
and unchecked use of nanoparticles resulted in a public discussion about their
potential antagonistic effects in ecosystems. Over the past decade, many reports
have shown opposite results regarding the effects of ENPs in plants (Miralles et al.
2012; Judy and Bertsch 2014). One of the reasons for this inconsistency is that dif-
ferent toxicity endpoints have been used which range from seed germination and
seedling growth to cytotoxicity and genotoxicity. It is also evident that plants differ
in their response to ENPs such as CNTs enhance seed germination by increasing
water uptake efficiency in tomato (Wu et al. 2008) and rice (Nair et al. 2010), but
exhibit inhibitory effect on root elongation in tomato and lettuce (Canas et al. 2008).
Likewise, TiO2 NPs increase rate of photosynthesis (Lei et al. 2007) and nitrogen
metabolism (Linglan et al. 2008), but they also lead to the production of antioxidant
stress (Lei et al. 2008). Leaves of lettuce had been reported to internalize the foliar-
sprayed Ag NPs, thereby maximizing their chances of transfer to humans through
food chain (Larue et al. 2014). Although toxicity due to Ag NPs in humans is an area
of active research, the damage to cell membrane and DNA from the exposure has
been reported (AshaRani et al. 2009; Gliga et al. 2014; Vrcek et al. 2014). Some
methodological problems that are commonly encountered in plant nanotoxicology
include: (1) the use of high concentrations of ENPs (e.g., up to 10 g/l), (2) the use
of pristine form rather than realistic forms of NPs, and (3) neglecting appropriate
requirements for control treatments.
ENPs can cause toxicity through the following ways: (1) release of toxic ions
such as Zn2+, Ag+, and Cu2+ upon dissolution; (2) clogging due to mechanical dam-
age (Asli and Neumann 2009); (3) excessive production of reactive oxygen species
(ROS) (Shen et al. 2010; Zhao et al. 2012); (4) surface reconstruction of biomolecu-
lar structures due to release of surface free energy on binding interactions (Nel et al.
2009; Atha et al. 2012); and (5) biomolecular oxidation through catalytic reactions
(Zhao et al. 2012). The nature of bonding between nanoparticles and plants is
dependent upon the innate attributes of NPs such as their size, shape, chemical com-
position, surface roughness, hydrophilicity, and hydrophobicity (Nel et al. 2009;
Sharifi et al. 2012). From a toxicological point of view, particle size is much more
critical because as the particle size is reduced, there is increase in surface area which
increases proportion of atoms or molecules of that particle on the surface layer.
These size-dependent characteristics modify the interfacial reactivity and the
86 J. M. War et al.
capability to traverse physiological barriers. Many studies have revealed that the
uptake and phytotoxicity of ENPs depends on particle size, the smaller particles
generally get accumulated to higher levels and are more toxic than their bulk parti-
cles (Slomberg and Schoenfisch 2012; Judy et al. 2012). The shape and crystal
structure of NPs also influence its uptake and toxicity, for example, anatase TiO2
NPs being more toxic than rutile TiO2; anatase NPs cause membrane leakage and
cell necrosis, while rutile NPs lead to formation of ROS and cause apoptosis (Auffan
et al. 2009). Similarly, ZnO nanopyramids showed significant inhibition of
β-galactosidase enzyme as compared to ZnO nanoplates and spheres (Cha et al.
2015). The extrinsic properties of NPs such as surface charge (zeta potential), sur-
face coating, stability characteristics, valence of the surface layer, and particle
aggregation are also of great importance that influence their interactions with plants.
Research-based evidences had shown that positively charged surfaces are
absorbed through endocytosis (Navarro et al. 2008; Onelli et al. 2008), while nega-
tively charged surfaces are more likely to be transported through vascular tissues
(Zhu et al. 2012; Zhai et al. 2015). By modifying the surface coating, behavior of
ENPs can be altered, e.g., coating MSNPs with triethyleneglycol to improve their
penetration potential into plant cells (Torney et al. 2007). ENP coatings have also
been successfully used as an effective means of reducing the dissolution properties
and release of toxic ions (Yang et al. 2012). Extrinsic properties are however effec-
tively influenced by the nature of suspending media (Auffan et al. 2009), its ionic
strength, pH, and composition.
Although the risk of environmental exposure has increased due to global produc-
tion and consumption of nanomaterials, there is a general agreement between the
scientific communities that the information regarding the interactions of nanomate-
rials with plants and microbes is limited. A guideline was published by European
Food Safety Authority (EFSA) in 2009 which emphasizes on potential toxicity of
nanomaterials (Ganzleben et al. 2011). Nanoparticle-based antimicrobial pesticide
called as HeiQ AGS-20 has already been approved by USEPA in 2010, but in case
of other agrochemicals the regulations for use of nanomaterials remained elusive.
Similarly, the use of nanomaterials (NMs) in food processing and packaging at the
US FDA is lacking a specific regulatory guidance. However, in spite of lacking
regulatory framework, it will not inhibit the application of NMs in agriculture.
There is a need for extensive assessment of NPs in agri-food sector for public accep-
tance so that the challenges which were faced by genetically modified organisms
(GMOs) worldwide could be prevented. Their application in agriculture (e.g., crop
improvement) should be governed in a precise manner based on safety-by-design
principle and guided by plant physiology, NP functionalization, and nanomedicine-
inspired nano-delivery systems to effectively supply bioactive molecules, pesti-
cides, and nutrients to crops with minimizing adverse effects on other organisms
and environment.
8 Conclusions and Future Perspective
Nanotechnology holds an eminent position among most recent technical innova-

tions in the field of agriculture. It has sufficient potential to remodel agricultural
system and increases food production to fulfill demands in an efficient and cost-
effective way. As per European Commission, nanotechnology is one of the “Key
Enabling Technologies” that leads towards sustainable competitivity and growth in
several industrial sectors. Its application in biotechnology (i.e., nanobiotechnology)
led to the rapid development of marketable formulations with implementation of
artificially designed nanoparticles (called engineered nanoparticles) for crop
improvement. In order to avoid the indiscriminate and excess use of conventional
pesticides and fertilizers in plants, nanoparticles turn out to be a gifted tool of this
age. Nanotechnology has great potential to increase crop production and productiv-
ity from confined land areas by managing the application of inputs through smart
delivery system, nanosensors, nanoscale coatings, and other nanomaterials. This
technology is developing fast and its applications will highly energize the agricul-
tural sector in the coming years that will lead to second green revolution. Although
the approach of nanotechnology is interesting and promising and has the power to
shower its advantages on agriculture and food sector, but it has been apprehended
with unforeseen risks. Therefore, making awareness about the advantages and chal-
lenges of nanotechnology for its better acceptance by people and society is required
and extensive studies need to be carried out to understand the mechanism of
nanoparticle functions, toxicity, and their impact on environment.
References
Abobatta WF (2017) Different Impacts of Nanotechnology in Agricultural sector development.

Nano Technology Science and application-the Creative Researchers first scientific annual
conference
Abobatta WF (2018) Nanotechnology Application in Agriculture, Acta Scientific Agriculture
(ISSN: 2581-365X) 2(6)
Ahmad P, Rasool S (2014) Emerging technologies and management of crop stress tolerance: vol-
ume 1—biological techniques. Academic Press, San Diego
Al Sherbini A, Abd El-Gawad HG, Kamal MA, El-feky SA (2015) Potential of He-Ne laser irra-
diation and iron nanoparticles to increase growth and yield of pea. Amer-Euras J Agric Environ
Sci 15(7):1435–1446
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):3365–3375
Almeelbi T, Bezbaruah AN (2012) Aqueous phosphate removal using nanoscale zero-valent iron.
J Nanopart Res 14:1497–1500
88 J. M. War et al.
Al-Oubaidi HKM, Kasid NM (2015) Increasing (phenolyic and flavonoids compounds) of Cicer
arietinum L. from embryo explant using titanium dioxide nanoparticle in vitro. World J
Pharmaceut Res 4(11):1791–1799
Amuamuha L, Pirzad A, Hadi H (2012) Effect of varying concentrations and time of nanoiron foliar
application on the yield and essential oil of pot marigold. Int Res J Appl Basic Sci 3:2085–2090
Anjali C, Sharm Y, Mukherjee A, Chandrasekaran N (2012) Neem oil (Azadirachta indica)
nanoemulsion—a potent larvicidal agent against Culex quinquefasciatus. Pest Manag Sci
68:158–163
Arora S, Sharma P, Kumar S, Nayan R, Khanna PK, Zaidi MGH (2012) Gold nanoparticle induced
enhancement in growth and seed yield of Brassica juncea. Plant Growth Regul 66:303–339
AshaRani PV, Mun GLK, Hande MP, Valiyaveettil S (2009) Cytotoxicity and genotoxicity of silver
nanoparticles in human cells. ACS Nano 3(2):279–290
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 32:577–584
Atha DH, Wang H, Petersen EJ, Cleveland D, Holbrook RD, Jaruga P, Dizdaroglu M, Xing B,
Nelson BC (2012) Copper oxide nanoparticle mediated DNA damage in terrestrial plant mod-
els. Environ Sci Technol 46:1819–1827
Auffan M, Bottero J, Lowry G, Jolivet J, Wiesner M (2009) Towards a definition of inorganic nano-
particles from an environmental, health and safety perspective. Nat Nanotechnol 4:634–641
Bahreini M, Omidi M, Bondarian F, Gholibaygian M (2015) Metabolites screening of nano elic-
ited in vitro Iranian fennel (Foeniculum vulgare). Am J Biol Life Sci 3(5):194–198
Bakhtiari M, Moaveni P, Sani B (2015) The effect of iron nanoparticles spraying time and concen-
tration on wheat. Biol Forum 7(1):679–683
Barik TK, Sahu B, Swain V (2008) Nanosilica: from medicine to pest control. Parasitol Res
103:253–258
Batsmanova LM, Gonchar LM, Taran NY, Okanenko AA (2013) Using a colloidal solution of metal
nanoparticles as micronutrient fertiliser for cereals. In: Proceedings of the international confer-
ence on nanomaterials: applications and properties, Crimea, Ukraine, Proc NAP2, 04NABM14
Bharathi P, Balasubramanian N, Anitha S, Vijayabharathi V, Bhuvenswari (2016) Improvement
of membrane system for water treatment by synthesized gold nanoparticles. J Environ Biol
37:1407–1414
Biswal SK, Nayak AK, Parida UK, Nayak PL (2012) Applications of nanotechnology in agricul-
ture and food sciences. Int J Sci Innov Discov 2(1):21–36
Brady NR, Weil RR (1999) In: Brady NR, Weil RR (eds) The nature and properties of soils.
Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, pp 415–473
Brennan B (2012) Nanobiotechnology in agriculture. Strategic business insights 2012,
Menlo Park, CA, USA, Available from: http://www.strategicbusinessinsights.com/about/
featured/2012/2012-10-nanobio-agriculture.shtml.
Burman U, Saini M, Kumar P (2013) Effect of zinc oxide nanoparticles on growth and antioxidant
system of chickpea seedlings. Toxicol Environ Chem 95(4):605–612
Canas JE, Long M, Nations S, Vadan R, Dai L, Luo M, Ambikapathi R, Lee EH, Olszyk D (2008)
Effects of functionalized and nonfunctionalized single-walled carbon nanotubes on root elon-
gation of selected crop species. Nanomater Environ 27:1922–1931
Celis R, Facenda G, Hermosin MC, Cornejo J (2005) Assessing factors influencing the release of
hexazinone from clay-based formulations. Int J Environ Anal Chem 85:1153–1164
Cha SH, Hong J, McGuffie M, Yeom B, Vanepps J, Kotov N (2015) Shape-dependent biomimetic
inhibition of enzyme by nanoparticles and their antibacterial activity. ACS Nano 9:9097–9105
Chao SHL, Choi HS (2005) Method for providing enhanced photosynthesis. Korea Research
Institute of Chemical Technology, Bulletin, South Korea Press, Daejeon, p 10
Chaouche T, Haddouchi F, Lazouni HA, Bekkara FA (2011) Phytochemical study of the plant
Foeniculum vulgare mill. Pharm Lett 3(2):329–333
Chen HC, Roco MC, Son JB, Jiang S, Larson CA, Gao Q (2013) Global nanotechnology develop-
ment from 1991 to 2012: patents, scientific publications, and effect of NSF funding. J Nanopart
Res 15:1951
96(1-6):17–31
Chinnamuthu CR, Kokiladevi E (2007) Weed management through nanoherbicides. In:
Chinnamuthu CR, Chandrasekaran B, Ramasamy C (eds) Application of nanotechnology in
agriculture. Tamil Nadu Agricultural University, Coimbatore
Choudary BM, Prasad BP, Kantam ML (1989) New interlamellar pesticide metal montmorillonite
complexes - a novel technique for controlled release. J Agric Food Chem 37:1422–1425
Choy JH, Choi SJ, Oh JM, Park T (2007) Clay minerals and double layered hydroxides for novel
biological applications. App Clay Sci 36(1–3):122–132
Corradini E (2010) A preliminary study of the incorporation of NPK fertilizer into chitosan
nanoparticles. eXPRESS Polym Lett 4(8):509–515
Cui H, Zhang P, Gu W, Jiang J (2009) Application of anatase TiO2 sol derived from peroxotitannic
acid in crop diseases control and growth regulation. NSTI-Nanotech 2:286–289
Das M, Saxena N, Dwivedi PD (2009) Emerging trends of nanoparticles application in food tech-
nology: Safety paradigms. Nanotoxicology 3:10–18
de Paiva LB, Morales AR, Diaz FRV (2008) Organoclays: properties, preparation and applications.
App Clay Sci 42:8–24
Debnath N, Das S, Seth D, Chandra R, Bha acharya SC, Goswami A (2011) Entomotoxic effect of
silica nanoparticles against Sitophilus oryzae (L.). J Pest Sci 84:99–105
DeRosa MC, Monreal C, Schnitzer M, Walsh R, Sultan Y (2010) Nanotechnology in fertilizers.
Dhoke SK, Mahajan P, Kamble R, Khanna A (2013) Effect of nano particles suspension on the
growth of mung (Vigna radiata) seedlings by foliar spray method. Nanotechnol Dev 3(1):1–5
Dias ACP, Tomas-Barberan FA, Fernandes-Ferreira M, Ferreas F (1998) Unusual flavonoids pro-
duced by callus cultures of Hypericum perforatum. Phytochemistry 48:1156–1168
Dimkpa CO, McLean JE, Latta DE, Manangón E, Britt DW, Johnson WP, Boyanov MI, Anderson
AJ (2012) CuO and ZnO nanoparticles: phytotoxicity, metal speciation, and induction of oxida-
tive stress in sand-grown wheat. J Nanopart Res 14:1–15
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):913–924
Ditta A (2012) How helpful is nanotechnology in agriculture? Adv Nat Sci Nanosci Nanotechnol
3(3):033002
Ebert TA, Taylor RAJ, Downer RA, Hall FR (1999) Deposit structure and efficacy of pesticide
application. 1: interactions between deposit size, toxicant concentration and deposit number.
Pestic Sci 55:783–792
Etxeberria E, Gonzalez P, Baroja-Fernandez E, Romero JP (2006) Fluid phase endocytic uptake
of artificial nano-spheres and fluorescent quantum dots by sycamore cultured cells: evidence
for the distribution of solutes to different intracellular compartments. Plant Signal Behav
1:196–200
Fakruddin M, Zakir H, Hafsa A (2012) Prospects and applications of nanobiotechnology: a medi-
cal perspective. J Nanobiotechnol 10:31
Feizi H, Kamali M, Jafari L, RezvaniMoghaddam P (2013) Phytotoxicity and stimulatory impacts
of nanosized and bulk titanium dioxide on fennel (Foeniculum vulgare Mill). Chemosphere
91(4):506–511
Frewer LJ, Norde W, Fischer ARH, Kampers FWH (2011) Nanotechnology in the Agri-food sec-
tor: implications for the future. Wiley-VCH, Weinheim. ISBN 9783527330607 p 328
Nanomed-Nanotechnol 5(4):382–386
90 J. M. War et al.
Galbraith DW (2007) Nanobiotechnology: silica breaks through in plants. Nat Nanotechnol

2(5):272–273
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/chemi-
cals/nanotech/pdf/review_legislation.pdf. Accessed 8 Dec 2015
Gao F, Hong F, Liu C, Zheng L, Su M, Wu X, Yang F, Wu C, Yang P (2008) Mechanism of nano-
anatase TiO2 on promoting photosynthetic carbon reaction of spinach. Biol Trace Elem Res J
111:239–253
Ghasemi B, Hosseini R, Nayeri FD (2015) Effects of cobalt nanoparticles on artemisinin produc-
tion and gene expression in Artemisia annua. Turk J Bot 39:769–777
protection and nutrition of plants. Biotechnol Adv 29:792–803
Giannousi K, Avramidis I, Dendrinou-Samara C (2013) Synthesis, characterization and evalua-
tion of copper based nanoparticles as agrochemicals against Phytophthora infestans. RSC Adv
3(44):21743–21752
Giraldo JP, Landry MP, Faltermeier SM, Mc Nicholas TP, Iverson NM, Boghossian AA, Reuel NF,
Hilmer AJ, Sen F, Jacqueline AB, Strano MS (2014) Plant nanobionics approach to augment
photosynthesis and biochemical sensing. Nat Mater 13:400–408
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):1–17
Goldwasser Y, Eizenberg H, Golan S, Kleifeld Y (2003) Control of Orobanche crenata and
Orobanche aegyptiaca in parsley. Crop Protect 22:295–305
González-Melendi P, Fernández-Pacheco R, Coronado MJ, Corredor E, Testillano PS, Risueño
MC, Marquina C, Ibarra MR, Rubiales D, Pérez-de-Luque A (2008) Nanoparticles as smart
treatment delivery systems in plants: assessment of different techniques of microscopy for their
visualization in plant tissues. Ann Bot 101(1):187–195
Gopinath K, Gowri S, Karthika V, Arumugam A (2014) Green synthesis of gold nanoparticles
from fruit extract of Terminalia arjuna, for the enhanced seed germination activity of Gloriosa
superba. J Nanostruct Chem 4:1–11
Grunert KG (2005) Food quality and safety: consumer perception and demand. Eur Rev Agric
Econ 32:369–391
Hafeez A, Razzaq A, Mahmood T, Jhanzab HM (2015) Potential of copper nanoparticles to
increase growth and yield of wheat. J Nanosci Adv Technol 1(1):6–11
Haghighi M, Afifipour Z, Mozafarian M (2012) The alleviation effect of silicon on seed germina-
tion and seedling growth of tomato under salinity stress. Veg Crops Res Bull 76(119):126
He X, Hwang H-M (2016) Nanotechnology in food science: functionality, applicability, and safety
assessment. J Food Drug Anal 24:671–681
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):207–215
Heiras-Palazuelos MJ, Ochoa-Lugo MI, Gutierrez-Dorado R, Lopez Valenzuela JA, Mora-Rochin
S, Milan Carrillo J (2013) Technological properties, antioxidant activity and total phenolic and
flavonoid content of pigmented chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) cultivars. Int J Food Sci Nutr
64:69–76
Hong F, Zhou J, Liu C, Yang F, Wu C, Zheng L, Yang P (2005) Effect of nano-TiO2 on photo-
chemical reaction of chloroplasts of spinach. Biol Trace Elem Res 105:269–279
Hu X, Kang J, Lu K, Zhou R, Mu L, Zhou Q (2014) Graphene oxide amplifies the phytotoxicity
of arsenic in wheat. Sci Rep 4:1–10
Huang X, Stein BD, Cheng H, Malyutin A, Tsvetkova IB, Baxter DV, Remmes NB, Verchot J,
Kao C, Bronstein LM, Dragnea B (2011) Magnetic virus-like nanoparticles in N. benthami-
ana plants: a new paradigm for environmental and agronomic biotechnological research. ACS
Nano 5:4037–4045
Husen A, Siddiqi KS (2014) Carbon and fullerene nanomaterials in plants system. J
Nanotechnol 12:1–10
Hussein MZ, Zainal Z, Yahaya AH, Foo DW (2002) Controlled release of a plant growth regulator,
alphanaphthalene acetate from the lamella of Zn–Al-layered double hydroxide nanocomposite.
J Control Release 82:417–427
Isah T (2019) Stress and defense responses in plant secondary metabolites production. Biol Res
52:39. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40659-019-0246-3
Jaberzadeh A, Moaveni P, Tohidi Moghadam HR, Zahedi H (2013) Influence of bulk and nanopar-
ticles 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):201–207
Janmohammadi M, Amanzadeh T, Sabaghnia N, Dashti S (2016) Impact of foliar application of
nano micronutrient fertilizers and titanium dioxide nanoparticles on the growth and yield com-
ponents of barley under supplemental irrigation. Acta Agric Slov 107(2):265–276
Jayarambabu N, kumari BS, Rao KV, Prabhu YT (2015) Beneficial role of zinc oxide nanoparticles
on green crop production. Int J Adv Multi Res Trends 2(1):273–282
Jayaseelan C, Rahuman AA, Kirthi AV, Marimuthu S, Santhoshkumar T, Bagavan A, Gaurav
K, Karthik L, Rao KV (2012) Novel microbial route to synthesize ZnO nanoparticles using
Aeromonas hydrophila and their activity against pathogenic bacteria and fungi. Spectrochim
Acta A 90:78–84
genic fungi. Plant Dis 93(10):1037–1043
Judy JD, Bertsch PM (2014) Bioavailability, toxicity, and fate of manufactured nanomaterials in
terrestrial ecosystems. Adv Agron 123:1–64
Judy JD, Unrine JM, Rao W, Wirick S, Bertsch PM (2012) Bioavailability of Gold Nanomaterials
to Plants: Importance of Particle Size and Surface Coating. Environ Sci Technol 46:8467–8474
Kabera JN, Semana E, Mussa AR, He X (2014) Plant secondary metabolites: biosynthesis, clas-
sification, function and pharmacological properties. J Pharm Pharmacol 2:377–392
Kanhed P, Birla S, Gaikwad SC, Gade AK, Seabra AD, Rubilar O, Duran N, Rai M (2014) In vitro
antifungal efficacy of copper nanoparticles against selected crop pathogenic fungi. Mater Lett
115:13–17
Kanjana D (2015) Potential applications of nanotechnology in major agriculture divisions - a
review. Int J Agric Environ Biotechnol 8(3):699–714
Karuppanapandian T, Wang HW, Prabakaran N, Jeyalakshmi K, Kwon M, Manoharan K, Kim W
(2011) 2, 4-dichlorophenoxyacetic acid-induced leaf senescence in mung bean (Vigna radiata
L. Wilczek) and senescence inhibition by co-treatment with silver nanoparticles. Plant Physiol
Biochem 49(2):168–177
Khan MS, Zaka M, Abbasi BH, Rahman LU, Shah A (2016) Seed germination and biochemical
profile of Silybum marianum exposed to monometallic and bimetallic alloy nanoparticles. IET
Nanobiotechnol 10(6):359–366. https://doi.org/10.1049/iet-nbt.2015.0050
Khodakovskaya MV, de Silva K, Biris AS, Dervishi E, Villagarcia H (2012) Carbon nanotubes
induce growth enhancement of tobacco cells. ACS Nano 6(3):2128–2135
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):115–123
Khot LR, Sankaran S, Maja JM, Ehsani R, Schuster EW (2012) Applications of nanomaterials in
agricultural production and crop protection: a review. Crop Prot 35:64–70
Kisan B, Shruthi H, Sharanagouda H, Revanappa SB, Pramod NK (2015) Effect of nano-zinc
oxide on the leaf physical and nutritional quality of spinach. Agrotechnol 5:135
Klaine SJ, Alvarez PJJ, Batley GE, Fernandes TF, Handry RD, Lyon DY, Manendra S, McKaughlin
MJ, Lead JR (2008) Nanomaterials in the environment: behavior, fate bioavailability, and
effects. Environ Toxicol Chem 27:1825–1851
Klingenfuss F (2014) Testing of TiO2 nanoparticles on wheat and microorganisms in a soil micro-
cosm. Thesis for Master of Science in ecotoxicology, University of Gothenburg 62
Kole C, Kole P, Randunu KM, Choudhary P, Podila R, Ke PC (2013) Nanobiotechnology can boost
crop production and quality: first evidence from increased plant biomass, fruit yield and phyto-
medicine content in bitter melon (Momordica charantia). BMC Biotechnol 13:37
92 J. M. War et al.
Krishnaraj C, Jagan EG, Ramachandran R, Abirami SM, Mohan N, Kalaichelvan PT (2012) Effect
of biologically synthesized silver nanoparticles on Bacopa monnieri (Linn.) Wettst. Plant
growth metabolism. Process Biochem 47:651–658
Kumar P (2011) Nanotechnology in agriculture. Financing Agric 43(10):8–10
Kumar V, Guleria P, Kumar V, Yadav SK (2013) Gold nanoparticle exposure induces growth and
yield enhancement in Arabidopsis thaliana. Sci Total Environ 461:462–468
Lahiani MH, Dervishi E, Chen JH, Nima Z, Gaume A, Biris AS, Khodakovskaya MV (2013)
Impact of carbon nanotubes exposure to seeds of valuable crops. ACS Appl Mater Interfaces
5(16):7965–7973
Lamsal K, Kim SW, Jung JH, Kim YS, Kim KS, Lee YS (2011) Application of silver nanopar-
ticles for the control of Colletotrichum species in vitro and pepper anthracnose disease in field.
Mycobiology 39(3):194–199
Larue C, Michel HC, Sobanska S, Trcera N, Sorieul S, Cecillon L, Ouerdane L, Legros S, Sarret
G (2014) Fate of pristineTiO2 nanoparticles and aged paint-containing TiO2 nanoparticles in
lettuce crop after foliar exposure. J Hazard Mater 273:17–26
Laware SL, Raskar S (2014) Influence of zinc oxide nanoparticles on growth, flowering and seed
productivity in onion. Int J Curr Microbiol Appl Sci 3(7):874–881
Lei Z, Mingyu S, Chao L, Liang C, Hao H, Xiao W, Xiaoqing L, Fan Y, Fengqing G, Fashui H
(2007) Effects of NanoanataseTiO2 on photosynthesis of spinach chloroplasts under different
light illumination. Biol Trace Elem Res 119:68–76
Lei Z, Mingyu S, Xiao W, Chao L, Chunxiang Q, Liang C, Hao H, Xiaoqing L, Fashui H (2008)
Antioxidant stress is promoted by nano-anatase in spinach chloroplasts under UV-B radiation.
Biol Trace Elem Res 121:69–79
Lei C, Ma D, Pu G, Qiu X, Du Z, Wang H, Li G, Ye H, Liu B (2011) Foliar application of chitosan
activates artemisinin biosynthesis in Artemisia annua L. Ind Crop Prod 33:176–182
Li ZZ, Chen JF, Liu F, Liu AQ, Wang Q, Sun HY, Wen LX (2007) Study of UV-shielding properties
of novel porous hollow silica nanoparticle carriers for avermectin. Pest Manag Sci 63:241–246
Li P, Chen J, Wu P (2011) Agronomic characteristics and grain yield in 30 spring wheat genotypes
under drought stress and nonstress conditions. Agron J 103:1619–1628
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):168–178
Liu R, Lal R (2014) Synthetic apatite nanoparticles as a phosphorus fertilizer for soybean (Glycine
max). Sci Rep 4:5686
Liu XM, Zhang FD, Zhang SQ, He XS, Fang R, Feng Z, Wang Y (2005) Effects of nano-ferric
oxide on the growth and nutrients absorption of peanut. Plant Nutr Fert Sci 11:14–18
Liu F, Wen LX, Li ZZ, Yu W, Sun HY, Chen JF (2006) Porous hollow silica nanoparticles as con-
trolled delivery system for water-soluble pesticide. Mater Res Bullet 41:2268–2275
Liu Y, Tong Z, Prudhomme RK (2008a) Stabilized polymeric nanoparticles for controlled and
efficient release of bifenthrin. Pest Manag Sci 64:808–812
Liu J, Wang F, Wang L, Xiao S, Tong C, Tang D, Liu X (2008b) Preparation of fluorescence
starch-nanoparticle and its application as plant transgenic vehicle. J Central South Uni Technol
15(6):768–773
Liu Q, Chen B, Wang Q, Shi X, Xiao Z, Lin J, Fang X (2009) Carbon nanotubes as molecular
transporters for walled plant cells. Nano Lett 9:1007–1010
Liu R, Zhang H, Lal R (2016) Effects of stabilized nanoparticles of copper, zinc, manganese, and
iron oxides in low concentrations on lettuce (Lactuca sativa) seed germination: nanotoxicants
or nanonutrients? Water Air Soil Pollut 227:42–54
López-Moreno ML, de la Rosa G, Hernández-Viezcas JA, Peralta-Videa JR, Gardea-Torresdey JL
(2010) XAS corroboration of the uptake and storage of CeO2 nanoparticles and assessment
of their differential toxicity in four edible plant species. J Agric Food Chem 58(6):3689–3693
Lu CM, Zhang CY, Wen JQ, Wu GR, Tao MX (2002) Research of the effect of nanometer materi-
als on germination and growth enhancement of Glycine max and its mechanism. Soybean Sci
21:168–172
Mahajan P, Dhoke SK, Khanna AS (2011) Effect of nano-ZnO particle suspension on growth
of mung (Vigna radiata) and gram (Cicer arietinum) seedlings using plant agar method. J
Nanotechnol 2011:7. Article ID 696535
Malakouti MJ, Tehrani MM (2005) The role of micronutrients in yield increasing and improving
quality of agricultural products, 3rd edn. Tarbiat Modares University, Tehran, pp 273–279
Marchiol L, Mattiello A, Pošćić F, Fellet G, Zavalloni C, Carlino E, Musett R (2016) Changes in
physiological and agronomical parameters of barley (Hordeum vulgare) exposed to cerium and
titanium dioxide nanoparticles. Int J Environ Res Public Health 13:332–350
Mariya V, Khodakovskayaa MV, Silvaa KD, Nedosekinb DA, Dervishic E, Birisa AS, Shashkov
EV, Galanzhab EI, Zharov VP (2011) Complex genetic, photothermal, and photoacoustic anal-
ysis of nanoparticle-plant interactions. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 108(3):1028–1033
Martin-Ortigosa S, Valenstein JS, Sun W, Moeller L, Fang N, Trewyn BG, Lin VS, Wang K (2012)
Parameters affecting the efficient delivery of mesoporous silica nanoparticle materials and gold
nanorods into plant tissues by the biolistic method. Small 8:413–422
Martin-Ortigosa S, Peterson DJ, Valenstein JS, Lin VS, Trewyn BG, Lyznik LA, Wang K (2014)
Mesoporous silica nanoparticle-mediated intracellular Cre-protein delivery for maize genome
editing via lox-P site excision. Plant Physiol 164:537–547
Meetoo D (2011) Nanotechnology and the food sector: from the farm to the table. Emirates J Food
Agric 23(5):387–403
Miralles P, Church TL, Harris AT (2012) Toxicity, uptake, and translocation of engineered nano-
materials in vascular plants. Environ Sci Technol 46:9224–9239
Mishael YG, Undabeytia T, Rabinovitz O, Rubin B, Nir S (2002) Slow-release formulations of
sulfometuron incorporated in micelles adsorbed on montmorillonite. J Agric Food Chem
50:2864–2869
Misra P, Shukla PK, Pramanik K, Gautam S, Kole C (2016) Nanotechnology for crop improve-
ment. In: Kole C, Kumar D, Khodakovskaya M. (eds) Plant Nanotechnology. Springer, Cham.
pp. 219-256
Morales MI, Rico CM, Hernandez-Viezcas JA, Nunez JE, Barrios AC, Tafoya A, Flores-Marges JP,
Peralta-Videa JR, Gardea-Torresdey JL (2013) Toxicity assessment of cerium oxide nanopar-
ticles in cilantro (Coriandrum sativum L.) plants grown in organic soil. J Agric Food Chem
61:6224–6230
Morteza E, Moaveni P, Farahani HA, Kiyani M (2013) Study of photosynthetic pigments changes
of maize (Zea mays L.) under nano TiO2 spraying at various growth stages. Springer Plus
2(1):247
Naderi MR, Shahraki AD (2013) Nanofertilizers and their roles in sustainable agriculture. Int J
Agric Crop Sci 5(19):2229–2232
Najafi S, Jamei R (2014) Effect of silver nanoparticles and Pb (NO3)2 on the yield and chemical
composition of mung bean (Vigna radiata). J Stress Physiol Biochem 10:316–325
Navarro E, Baun A, Behra R, Hartmann NB, Filser J, Miao AJ, Quigg A, Santschi PH, Sigg L
(2008) Environmental behavior and ecotoxicity of engineered nanoparticles to algae, plants,
and fungi. Ecotoxicology 17(5):372–386
Nejatzadeh-Barandozi F, Darvishzadeh F, Aminkhani A (2014) Effect of nano silver and silver
nitrate on seed yield of (Ocimum basilicum L.). Organic Med Chem Lett 4(1):1–6
Nel A, Xia T, Madler L, Li N (2006) Toxic potential of materials at the nanolevel. Science
311:622–627
Nel AE, Madler L, Velegol D, Xia T, Hoek E, Somasundaran P, Klaessig F, Castranova V,
Thompson M (2009) Understanding biophysicochemical interactions at the nano-biointerface.
Nat Mater 8:543–557 62
Ngo QB, Dao TH, Nguyen HC, TranXT Nguyen TV, Khuu TD, Huynh TH (2014) Effects of nano-
crystalline powders (Fe, Co and Cu) on the germination, growth, crop yield and product quality
of soybean (Vietnamese species DT-51). Adv Nat Sci Nanosci Nanotechnol 5:1–7
94 J. M. War et al.
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):8972–8980
Onelli E, Baschong C, Caccianiga M, Moscatelli A (2008) Clathrin-dependent and independent
endocytic pathways in tobacco protoplasts revealed by labeling with charged nanogold. J Expt
Bot 59:3051–3068
Panwar J, Jain N, Bhargaya A, Akthar MS, Yun YS (2012) Positive effect of zinc oxide nanopar-
ticles on tomato plants: a step towards developing “nano-fertilizers”. In: 3rd International
Conference on Environmental Research and Technology, pp 348–352
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):189–192
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):228–236
Park HJ, Kim SH, Kim HJ, Choi SH (2006) A new composition of nanosized silica-silver for con-
trol of various plant diseases. Plant Pathol 22(3):295–302
Patra P, Choudhury SR, Mandal S, Basu A, Goswami A, Gogoi R, Srivastava C, Kumar R, Gopal
M (2013) Effect of sulfur and ZnO nanoparticles on stress physiology and plant (Vigna radiata)
nutrition. In: Giri PK, Goswami DK, Perumal A (eds) Advanced nanomaterials and nanotech-
nology. Springer, Berlin, pp 301–309
Pérez-de-Luque A, Hermosín MC (2013) Nanotechnology and its use in agriculture. In: Bagchi D,
Bagchi M, Moriyama H, Shahidi F (eds) Bio-nanotechnology: a revolution in food, biomedical
and health sciences. Wiley-Blackwell, West Sussex, pp 299–405
pp 381–394
Prasad TNVKV, Sudhakar P, Sreenivasulu Y, Latha P, Munaswamy V, Reddy KR, Sreeprasad
TSP, Sajanlal R, Pradeep T (2012) Effect of nanoscale zinc oxide particles on the germination,
growth and yield of peanut. J Plant Nutr 35(6):905–927
Priester JH, Gea Y, Mielke RE, Horsta AM, Moritzb SC, Espinosae K, Gelb J, Walkerg SL, Nisbet
RM, Ani YJ, Schimel JP, Palmer RG, Viezcasc J, Zhao L, Torresdey J, Holden PA (2012)
Soybean susceptibility to manufactured nanomaterials with evidence for food quality and soil
fertility interruption. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 109(37):14734–14735
Raei M, Angaji SA, Omidi M, Khodayari M (2014) Effect of abiotic elicitors on tissue culture of
Aloe vera. Int J Biosci 5(1):74–81
Rai MK, Deshmukh SD, Ingle AP, Gade AK (2012) Silver nanoparticles: the powerful nanoweapon
against multidrug-resistant bacteria. J Appl Microbiol 112(5):841–852
Raliya R, Tarafdar JC (2013) ZnO nanoparticle biosynthesis and its effect on phosphorous mobi-
lizing enzyme secretion and gum contents in cluster bean (Cyamopsis tetragonoloba L.). Agric
Res 2(1):48–57
Raliya R, Saharan V, Dimkpa C, Biswas P (2017) Nanofertilizer for precision and sustainable agri-
culture: current state and future perspectives. J Agric Food Chem 66(26):6487–6503
Rameshaiah GN, Pallavi J, Siddiqui S (2015) Nano fertilizers and nano sensors an attempt for
developing smart agriculture. Int J Eng Res Gen Sci 3(1):314–320
Razzaq A, Ammara R, Jhanzab HM, Mahmood T, Hafeez A, Hussain S (2016) A novel nanomate-
rial to enhance growth and yield of wheat. J Nanosci Technol 2(1):55–58
Rico CM, Lee SC, Rubenecia R, Mukherjee A, Hong J, Peralta-Videa JR, Gardea-Torresdey JL
(2014) Cerium oxide nanoparticles impact yield and modify nutritional parameters in wheat
(Triticum aestivum L.). J Agric Food Chem 62:9669–9675
Roberts TL (2009) The role of fertilizer in growing the world’s food. Better Crops Plant Food
93:12–15
Salama HMH (2012) Effects of silver nanoparticles in some crop plants, common bean (Phaseolus
vulgaris L.) and corn (Zea mays L.). Int Res J Biotechnol 3(10):190–197
Sasson Y, Levy-Ruso G, Toledano O, Ishaaya I (2007) Nanosuspensions: emerging novel agro-
chemical formulations. In: Ishaaya I, Nauen R, Horowitz AR (eds) Insecticides design using
advanced technologies. Springer-Verlag, Dordrecht, pp 1–32
Scott N, Chen H (2013) Nanoscale science and engineering for agriculture and food systems. Ind
Seif SM, Sorooshzadeh A, Rezazadehs H, Naghdibadi HA (2011) Effect of nanosilver and silver
nitrate on seed yield of borage. J Med Plants Res 5(2):171–175
Serag MF, Kaji N, Gaillard C, Okamoto Y, Terasaka K, Jabasini M, Tokeshi M, Mizukami H,
Bianco A, Baba Y (2011) Trafficking and subcellular localization of multiwalled carbon nano-
tubes in plant cells. ACS Nano 5:493–499
Servin A, Elmer W, Mukherjee A, Torre-Roche RD, Hamdi H, White JC, Bindraban P, Dimkpa C
(2015) A review of the use of engineered nanomaterials to suppress plant disease and enhance
crop yield. J Nanopart Res 17:92
Shah V, Belozerova I (2009) Influence of metal nanoparticles on the soil microbial community and
germination of lettuce seeds. Water Air Soil Pollut 197:143–148
Sharafi E, Nekoei SMK, Fotokian MH, Davoodi D, Mirzaei HH, Hasanloo T (2013) Improvement
of hypericin and hyperforin production using zinc and iron nano-oxides as elicitors in cell sus-
pension culture of St John’s wort (Hypericum perforatum L.). J Med Plants By-prod 2:177–184
Sharifi S, Behzadi S, Laurent S, Forrest M, Stroeve P, Mehmoudi M (2012) Toxicity of nanomate-
rials. Chem Soc Rev 41:2323–2343
Sharma P, Bhatt D, Zaidi MG, Saradhi PP, Khanna PK, Arora S (2012) Silver nanoparticle-
mediated enhancement in growth and antioxidant status of Brassica juncea. Appl Biochem
Sharon M, Choudhry A, Kumar R (2010) Nanotechnology in agricultural disease and food safety.
J Phytology 2:83–92
Shen CX, Zhang Q, Li J, Bi F, Yao N (2010) Induction of programmed cell death in Arabidopsis
and rice by single-wall carbon nanotubes. Am J Bot 97:1602–1609
Sheykhbaglou R, Sedghi M, Shishevan MT, Sharifi RS (2010) Effects of nano-iron oxide particles
on agronomic traits of soybean. Not Sci Biol 2:112–113
Siddiqui MH, Al-Whaibi MH (2014) Role of nano-SiO2 in germination of tomato (Lycopersicum
esculentum seeds mill.). Saudi J Biol Sci 21:13–17
Silva MS, Cocenza DS, Grillo R, Melo NFS, Tonello PS, Oliveira LC, Cassimiro DL, Rosa AH,
Fraceto LF (2011) Paraquat-loaded alginate/chitosan nanoparticles: preparation, characteriza-
tion and soil sorption studies. J Hazard Mater 190(1-3):366–374
Slomberg DL, Schoenfisch MH (2012) Silica nanoparticle phytotoxicity to Arabidopsis thaliana.
Environ Sci Technol 46:10247–10254
Sims JT (1986) Soil pH effects on the distribution and plant availability of manganese, copper, and
zinc. Soil Sci Soc Am J 50:367–373
Singh J, Dutta T, Kim KH, Rawat M, Samddar P, Kumar P (2018) “Green” synthesis of metals
and their oxide nanoparticles: applications for environmental remediation. J Nanobiotechnol
16(1):84
Snow RW, Guerra CA, Noor AM, Myint HY, Hay SI (2005) The global distribution of clinical
episodes of Plasmodium falciparum malaria. Nature 434:214–217
Sonkaria S, Ahn SH, Khare V (2012) Nanotechnology and its impact on food and nutrition: a
review. Recent Pat Food Nutr Agric 4(1):8–18
Sugunan A, Dutta J (2008) Pollution treatment, remediation and sensing. In: Harald K (ed)
Nanotechnology, vol 3. Wiley-VCH, Weinheim, pp 125–143
Tahmasbi D, Zarghami R, Azghandi AV, Chaichi M (2011) Effects of nanosilver and nitroxin
biofertilizer on yield and yield components of potato minitubers. Int J Agric Biol 13:986–990
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):257–262
96 J. M. War et al.
Taran NY, Gonchar OM, Lopatko KG, Batsmanova LM, Patyka MV, Volkogon MV (2014) The
effect of colloidal solution of molybdenum nanoparticles on the microbial composition in rhi-
zosphere of Cicer arietinum L. Nanoscale Res Lett 9:289
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):4885–4892
Tian YA, Gao B, Silvera-Batista C, Ziegler KJ (2010) Transport of engineered nanoparticles in
saturated porous media. J Nanopart Res 12(7):2371–2380
Tiwari DK, Dasgupta-Schubert N, Villasenor Cendejas LM, Villegas J, Carreto Montoya L, Borjas
Garcia SE (2014) Interfacing carbon nanotubes (CNT) with plants: enhancement of growth,
water and ionic nutrient uptake in maize (Zea mays) and implications for nanoagriculture. Appl
Nanosci 2:577–591
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):999–1006
Torney F, Trewyn BG, Lin VS, Wang K (2007) Mesoporous silica nanoparticles deliver DNA and
Tripathi S, Sonkar SK, Sarkar S (2011) Growth stimulation of gram (Cicer arietinum) plant by
water soluble carbon nanotubes. Nanoscale 3(3):1176–1181
Tsuji K (2001) Microencapsulation of pesticides and their improved handling safety. J
Microencapsul 18:137–147
Vrcek 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 31(6):1–14
Wang L, Li Z, Zhang G, Dong J, Eastoe J (2007) Oil-in-water nanoemulsions for pesticide formu-
lations. J Colloid Interface Sci 314:230–235
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):1–13
Wang P, Lombi E, Zhao FJ, Kopittke PM (2016) Nanotechnology: a new opportunity in plant sci-
ences. Trends Plant Sci 21(8):699–712
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):40–44
Watson JL, Fang T, Dimpka CO, Britt DW, McLean JE, Jacobson A, Anderson AJ (2015) The phy-
totoxicity of ZnO nanoparticles on wheat varies with soil properties. Biometals 28(1):101–112
Wu L, Liu M (2008) Preparation and properties of chitosan-coated NPK compound fertilizer with
controlled release and water-retention. Carbohydr Polym 72:240–247
Wu L, Liu M, Liang R (2008) Preparation and properties of a double-coated slow-release NPK
compound fertilizer with superabsorbent and water retention. Bioresour Technol 99(3):547–554
Wu J, Du H, Liao X, Zhao Y, Li L, Yang L (2011) An improved particle bombardment for the gen-
eration of transgenic plants by direct immobilization of releasable Tn5 transposases onto gold
particles. Plant Mol Biol 77:117–127 17
Xu L, Liu Y, Bai R, Chen C (2010) Applications and toxicological issues surrounding nanotechnol-
ogy in the food industry. Pure App Chem 82:349–372
Yan A, Chen Z (2019) Impacts of silver nanoparticles on plants: a focus on the phytotoxicity and
underlying mechanism. Int J Mol Sci 20(5):1003
Yang F, Hong F, You W, Liu C, Gao F, Wu C, Yang P (2006) Influence of nano-anatase TiO2 on the
nitrogen metabolism of growing spinach. Biol Trace Elem Res 110(2):179–190
Yang F, Liu C, Gao F, Su M, Wu X, Zheng L et al (2007) The improvement of spinach growth
by nano-anatase TiO2 treatment is related to nitrogen photoreduction. Biol Trace Elem Res
119:77–88
Yang X, Gondikas A, Marinakos S, Auffan M, Liu J, Kim H, Meyer J (2012) Mechanism of silver
nanoparticle toxicity is dependent on dissolved silver and surface coating in Caenorhabditis
elegans. Environ Sci Technol 46:1119–1127
Yarizade K, Hosseini R (2015) Expression analysis of ADS, DBR2, ALDH1 and SQS genes in
Artemisia vulgaris hairy root culture under nano cobalt and nano zinc elicitation. Ext J App
Sci 3(3):69–76
Yata VK, Tiwari BC, Ahmad I (2018) Nanoscience in food and agriculture: research, industries
and patents. Environ Chem Lett 16(1):79–84
Yugandhar P, Savithramma N (2013) Green synthesis of calcium carbonate nanoparticles and their
effects on seed germination and seedling growth of Vigna mungo (L.) Hepper. Int J Adv Res
1(8):89–103
Yuvakumar R, Elango V, Rajendran V, Kannan NS, Prabu P (2011) Influence of nanosilica powder
on the growth of maize crop (Zea mays L.). Int J Green Nanotechnol 3(1):180–190
Zahra Z, Waseem N, Zahra R, Lee H, Badshah MA, Mehmood A, Choi HK, Arshad M (2017)
Growth and metabolic responses of rice (Oryza sativa L.) cultivated in phosphorus-deficient
soil amended with TiO2 nanoparticles. J Agric Food Chem 65(28):5598–5606
Zhai G, Gutowski S, Walters K, Yan B, Schnoor J (2015) Charge, size, and cellular selectivity for
multiwall carbon nanotubes by maize and soybean. Environ Sci Technol 49:7380–7390
Zhang B, Zheng LP, Yi Li W, Wen Wang J (2013) Stimulation of artemisinin production in
Artemisia annua hairy roots by Ag-SiO2 core shell nanoparticles. Curr Nanosci 9:363–370
Zhao DX, Fu CX, Han YS, Lu DP (2005a) Effects of elicitation on jaceosidin and hispidulin
production in cell suspension cultures of Saussurea medusa. Process Biochem 40(2):739–745
Zhao J, Davis LC, Verpoorte R (2005b) Elicitor signal transduction leading to production of sec-
ondary metabolites. Biotechnol Adv 23:283–333
Zhao L, Peng B, Viezcas J, Rico C, Sun Y, Videa J, Tang X, Niu G, Jin L, Ramirez A, Zhang J,
Torresday J (2012) Stress response and tolerance of Zea mays to CeO2 nanoparticles: cross talk
among H2O2, heat shock protein, and lipid peroxidation. ACS Nano 6:9615–9622
Zheng L, Hong F, Lu S, Liu C (2005) Effect of nano-TiO2 on strength of naturally aged seeds and
growth of spinach. Biol Trace Element Res 104:83–91
Zhu ZJ, Wang H, Yan B, Zheng H, Jiang Y, Miranda O, Rotello V, Xing B, Vachet R (2012) Effect
of surface charge on the uptake and distribution of gold nanoparticles in four plant species.
Environ Sci Technol 46:12391–12398
Nanofertilizers: A Way Forward for Green
Economy
Bisma Pirzadah, Tanveer Bilal Pirzadah, Aarifa Jan,

and Khalid Rehman Hakeem
1 Introduction
During 1970s first green revolution which was targeted to the four basic elements
of production system viz., semi-dwarf high yielding varieties of wheat and rice,
ample use of chemical fertilizers, irrigation which consequently resulted in an
immeasurable increase in the agricultural production (Qureshi et al. 2018).
However, extensive use of fertilizers, pesticides, and herbicides to achieve more
production per unit area using high doses than optimum levels leads to major
problems like environmental pollution, degradation in the quality of food material,
development of resistance in different weeds, diseases, insects, soil degradation
and deficiency in the essential nutrients in soil, toxicity to beneficial micro-organ-
ism present above and below the soil surfaces, etc. (Pirzadah et al. 2019).
Nowadays because of these problems agricultural production is experiencing a
sharp decline, which has untimely affected the livelihood base of the farming com-
munity at large besides, it leads to food crises in near future (Ghaly 2009; Quasem
et al. 2009). Therefore there is need to produce nutritive agricultural produce rich
in protein and other essential nutrient required to the human and animal consump-
tion that is why emphasis should be laid on production of high quality food with
the required level of nutrients and proteins (Pijls et al. 2009). The need of the
hour is second green revolution in the world in which nano-scale science and
B. Pirzadah (*) · T. B. Pirzadah · A. Jan

K. R. Hakeem
Department of Biological Sciences, Faculty of Science, King Abdulaziz University,
Jeddah, Saudi Arabia
Princess Dr Najla Bint Saud Al-Saud Center for Excellence Research in Biotechnology,
King Abdulaziz University, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia

100 B. Pirzadah et al.
nanotechnology intend to have the capacity to revolutionize agriculture and food

system. Nanotechnology has immense capacity to enhance crop production
(Gruere et al. 2011), plant protection (Perez-de-Luque and Hermosin 2013), plant
disease identification (Frewer et al. 2011), global expansion of food production
(Biswal et al. 2012), improving quality of food materials (Sonkaria et al. 2012),
and decrease misuse of resources for sustainable development (Prasad et al. 2014).
The most important applications of nanotechnology were in the field of food and
agriculture production (Coles and Frewer 2013; Chen et al. 2014). At the nano-
scale, the matter presents altered properties which are novel and very different
from those observed at macroscopic level. Due to the unique properties of nano-
agrochemicals such as high surface-to-volume ratio, high reactivity, efficacy, and
efficiency, these nano-formulations could be employed in the agricultural and
food sector (Fig. 1) (Gutierrez et al. 2011). In addition to this, in agriculture there
is need for the development of smart materials that can specifically deliver chemi-
cals to particular target sites in plants which could be helpful in combating nutri-
ent deficiency. This system is called “Smart delivery system” which means
combination of particularly targeted, highly controlled, distantly regulated, and
collective attributes to avoid biological barrier for target achievement (Nair et al.
2010). “Smart delivery system” involves the use of physiologically important met-
als for improving formulation of fertilizer or pesticide by decreasing loss of nutri-
ent and increasing uptake in plant cell and technology advancement helps in the
large scale production of these nanoparticles (Naderi and Danesh-Shahraki 2013).
Therefore the development of these nanoparticles (nanofertilizers and nanopesti-
cides) with unique properties for the improvement in crop production may act as
an effective tool in agriculture for better pest and nutrient management (Scott and
Chen 2012; Batsmanova et al. 2013). Hence, these agricultural useable nanopar-
ticles developed with the help of nanotechnology can be exploited in the value
Fig. 1 Delivered as particles nano-scale dimensions, e.g., ZnO, CuO, TiO2

Nanofertilizers: A Way Forward for Green Economy 101
Fig. 2 Schematic representation of different nanotechnology applications in agriculture
chain of entire agriculture production system (Fig. 2) (Meena et al. 2017). The
present chapter critically analyzes the pertinent information available on the scope
and applications of nanofertilizer, nanofertilizer industry and its products. In this
chapter, we also discussed the economic analysis as well as the current and future
possibilities of nanofertilizer industry.
2 Nanofertilizer: As Smart Nano-Formulations
Conventional fertilizers are applied to the plants either through soil or by foliar
application in order to improve plant growth and yield to a greater extent (Bahera
and Panda 2009). Localized application of large amounts of fertilizer, in the form
of ammonium salts, urea, and a nitrate or phosphate compound possesses delete-
rious effects to the soil and thus deteriorates the environment. Besides much of
these fertilizers are unavailable to plants as they are lost as run-off and leaching
(Wilson et al. 2008). Commonly available chemical fertilizers include nitrogen,
phosphorous, and potassium that play an essential role in plant growth and devel-
opment, viz., nitrogen enhances growth of leaf and synthesis of chlorophyll and
protein; phosphorous enhances root, flower, and fruit growth; and potassium
plays a role in the synthesis of protein and boosts root and stem growth (Mandal
et al. 2009; Gu et al. 2009). In the applied dosage level of these fertilizers only
30–60% of nitrogen, 10–20% phosphorous, and 30–50% potassium were taken
up by the plant and the remaining amount was left in the soil. This causes con-
tamination to the soil and water resources as well as leads to the significant eco-
nomic loss. These demerits of conventional fertilizers can be reduced with the
help of nanotechnology in which major portion of these chemicals can be uti-
lized by the plants and a minimum portion remains in the environment. This can
be attained by utilizing nanomaterials which encapsulate the material with a thin
coating of protective film or supplied as emulsions or nanoparticles (deRosa
et al. 2010). Nanomaterials have potential contribution in slow release of fertil-
izers. Nano-coatings or surface coatings of nanomaterials on fertilizer particles
hold the material more strongly from the plant due to higher surface tension than
conventional surfaces. The comparison of nanotechnology-based formulations
and conventional fertilizer applications is given in Table 1 (Cui et al. 2010).
Moreover, nano-coatings provide surface protection for larger particles (Brady
and Weil 1999; Santoso et al. 1995). Nanofertilizers are synthesized or modified
form of traditional fertilizers which can be produced from different biological
materials using various nanotechnological approaches in order to improve soil
fertility, productivity, and quality of agricultural produces (Brunnert et al. 2006).
At nano-scale physical and chemical properties are different than the properties
of bulk material (Nel et al. 2006). Particles size of nanofertilizers is less than
100 nm which facilitates more penetration of nanoparticles into the plant from
applied surface such as soil or leaves for efficient nutrient management which are
more eco-friendly and reduce environmental pollution (Lin and Xing 2007).
Table 1 Comparison of nanotechnology-based formulations and conventional fertilizers

applications (Cui et al. 2010)
Properties Nanofertilizers Conventional fertilizers
Solubility and Improve solubility and dispersion of Less bioavailability to plants
dispersion of mineral insoluble nutrients in soil, reduce soil due to large particle size and
micronutrients absorption and fixation, and increase the less solubility
bioavailability
Nutrient uptake Might increase fertilizer efficiency and Bulk composite is not
efficiency uptake ratio of the soil nutrients in crop available for roots and
production and save fertilizer resource decrease efficiency
Controlled-release Release rate and release pattern of Excess release of fertilizers
modes nutrients for water-soluble fertilizers may produce toxicity and
might be precisely controlled through destroy ecological balance of
encapsulation in envelope forms soil
Effective duration of Nanofertilizers can extend effective Used by the plants at the time
nutrient release duration of nutrient supply of fertilizers of delivery, the rest is
into soil converted into insoluble salts
in the soil
Loss rate of fertilizer Reduce loss rate of fertilizer nutrients High loss rate by leaching,
nutrients into soil by leaching and/or leaking rain off and drift
3 Scope of Nanofertilizers in the Agriculture Industry
In order to prevent loss of fertilizer in the environment, minimize the dosage level,
and enhance efficiency, the fertilizers can be encapsulated or coated with some
particular nanomaterials. The procedure of coating or binding nano- and subnano-
composites helps to balance the delivery of nutrients from the fertilizer capsule (Liu
et al. 2001). This process of coating or binding nano-composites (nitrogen, phos-
phorous, potassium, micronutrients, mannose, and amino acid) results in the
increase of uptake and utilization of nutrients by several grain crops (Guo 2011). In
addition to this, Zn-Al coated double-hydroxide nano-composites have been uti-
lized for the slow delivery of chemical compounds that functions as regulators of
plant growth. Besides, Gliricidia sepium nano-composite encapsulated by urea
modified hydroxyapatite nanoparticle exhibited a moderate and controlled delivery
of nitrogen at three divergent pH values over time (Kottegoda et al. 2011). In the
crop productivity system, nitrogen fertilizer coated with nanoporous zeolite base
can be utilized as a secondary approach to boost nitrogen efficiency (Manikanadan
and Subramanian 2014). Carbon nanotubes are remarkable fertilizers which were
found to perforate into tomato seeds and enhance their rate of development and
growth. Carbon nanotubes actually perforated thick coat of seeds to help uptake of
water in seeds which was proven by several analytical methods (Khodakovskaya
et al. 2009). The process of fertilizer encapsulation within a nanoparticle is achieved
by encapsulating or coated with thin protective film on the nutrients or may be
released as emulsions or particles of nanoporous material (Rai et al. 2012). In recent
years, the utilization of controlled delivery of fertilizers begin to be one of the most
significant and novel technology to retain use of fertilizer and to reduce environ-
mental pollution (Guo et al. 2005). This technology involves the encapsulation or
coating of fertilizers with nanoparticle in order to protect the nanoparticles in the
soil for longer period of time and allow its controlled or slow delivery into the soil
for better management (Saigusa 2000; Teodorescu et al. 2009). The application of
nanofertilizers results in the slow and controlled delivery of elements in the soil and
halts eutrophication and restrains water pollution. Nanoparticles like chitosan have
been widely explored as a carrier for drug delivery system and also described as an
effective carrier for the slow/controlled delivery of nitrogen, phosphorous, and
potassium fertilizers in the soil. Chitosan is a bactericidal polymer which is biode-
gradable (Coma et al. 2002; No et al. 2007) and shows a beneficial interaction due
to the presence of polymeric cationic attributes which might be linked with nega-
tively charged polymers and molecules. These chitosan nanoparticles produced by
polymerization reaction with methacrylic acid were employed to absorb on to nitro-
gen, phosphorous, and potassium fertilizers for increasing efficiency and slow
release in the soil resulting in the overall progress in plant growth and productivity
(Corradini et al. 2010). Nanofertilizer technology is very innovative and scanty
reported literatures are available in the scientific journals. The data remain constant
for the past several decade and research efforts did not yield fruitful results. The
current growing awareness of the phenomenon and availability of inexpensive
n atural zeolites in the world have aroused considerable commercial interest on

developing zeolite based nanofertilizer (Ramesh et al. 2010). Chuprova et al. (2004)
found the beneficial effects of zeolite fertilizers on mobile humus substances of
chernozem and on biological productivity of maize. In another study, a patented
nano-composite consists of nitrogen, phosphorous, potassium, and micronutrients
and mannose and amino acids have been shown to increase the uptake and utiliza-
tion of nutrients by grain crops (Jinghua 2004). Bhattacharya et al. (2004) reported
that the balanced application of nitrogen, phosphorous, and potassium along with
sulfur, zinc, boron, and molybdenum will be an effective solution for higher grain
yield of pulses in red and lateritic soils. Liu et al. (2006) have shown that the organic
material (polystyrene) intercalated in the layers of kaolinite clay forms a cementing
of nano- and subnano-composites which are capable of regulating the release of
nutrients from the fertilizer capsule. Thus nanoparticles could be used in the mem-
brane control release of nutrients. Subramanian et al. (2008) reported that nanofer-
tilizers and nano-composites can be used to control the release of nutrients from the
fertilizer granules so as to improve the nutrient use efficiency while preventing the
nutrient ions from either getting fixed or lost to the environment. Recently, Sharmila
(2011) has monitored the nutrient release pattern of nanofertilizer carrying nitrogen
and the data have shown that nano-clay based fertilizer formulations (zeolite and
montmorillonite with a dimension of 30–40 nm) are capable of releasing the nitro-
gen for a longer period of time (>1000 h) than conventional fertilizers (<500 h).
4 Nanofertilizer Products-Novel Boon to the Farmers
In recent years research is being conducted to develop novel nano-products that

help the farmers to enhance their production yield (Liu and Lal 2015; Servin et al.
2015). Remarkably most of the nanomaterials apparently evaluated on crops as
“nano-fertilizers” either for commercial purposes produced and marketed by the
chemical companies. In addition to this, probability for using nanofertilizers for
large scale agriculture system is still problematic. However, many countries are
moving forward with the plan of using nanofertilizers in their agriculture system
for better crop production. For example, Myanmar government is currently work-
ing on a project in order to include nanofertilizers in their national administration
(Qureshi et al. 2018). Table 2 shows list of expected nanofertilizers products which
are believed to be imported into the country. It was evident from this table that the
companies which were in the list are not among the key global fertilizer industry
enterprises such as PotashCorp, Mosaic, Uralkali, Belaruskali, Yara International,
OCP, CF Industries, ICL, Agricum, K+S, Safcoor Koch. Therefore until and unless
such smaller companies are subservient to the larger ones, it was doubtful to what
magnitude the current level of their perceptibility and generation scale would
affect global developments in nanofertilizers production system. As for as the vol-
ume of the product was concerned, the products which were listed are below than
1 kg and as for their existence as nanofertilizers except for the tag “Nano” in their
Table 2 Nanofertilizer products approved for use in Myanmar (Dimkpa and Bindraban 2018)
Country
Company name Fertilizer name Specification of origin
SMTET Eco- Nano Ultra- Organic matter, 5.5%; T-N, 10%; Taiwan
technologies Co., Fertilizer (500) g T-P2O5, 9%; T-K2O, 14%; AC-P2O5, 8%;
Ltd. CA-K2O, 14%; CA-MgO, 3%
Shan Maw Myae Nano Micro Zn, 6%; B, 2%; Cu, 1%; Fe, 6%+; India
Trading Co., Ltd Nutrient (Eco Star) EDTA Mo, 0.05%; Mn, 5%+;
(500) g AMINOS, 5%
Green Organic Plant Nutrition N, 0.5%; P2O5, 0.7%; K2O, 3.9%; Ca, Thailand
World Co., Ltd. Powder (Green 2.0%; Mg, 0.2%; S, 0.8%; Fe, 1.0%;
Nano) (25) g Mn, 49 ppm; Cu, 17 ppm; Zn, 12 ppm
WAI International PPC Nano (120) mL M protein, 19.6%; Na2O, 0.3%; K2O, Malaysia
Development Co., 2.1%; (NH4)2SO4, 1.7%; diluent, 76%
Ltd.
PAC International Nano Calcium CaCO3, 77.9%; MgCO3, 7.4%; SiO2, Germany
Network Co., Ltd (Magic Green) (1) 7.47%; K, 0.2%; Na, 0.03%; P, 0.02%;
kg Fe, 7.4 ppm; Al2O3, 6.3 ppm; Sr,
804 ppm; sulfate, 278 ppm; Ba,
174 ppm; Mn, 172 ppm; Zn, 10 ppm
The Best Supplementary N, 0.5%; P2O5, 0.7%; K2O, 3.9%; Ca, Thailand
International Powder (The Best 2.0%; Mg, 0.2%; S, 0.75%; Fe, 0.03%;
Network Co., Ltd. Nano) (25) g Mn, 0.004%; Cu, 0.007%; Zn, 0.004%
Shan Maw Myae Nano Fertilizer (Eco N, 8.2%; K2O, 2.3%; organic matter, India
Trading Co., Ltd Star) (5) gm 75.9%; C:N, 5.4
World Connect Plus Hero Super Nano N, 0.7%; P2O5, 2.3%; K2O, 8.9%; Ca, Thailand
Myanmar Co., Ltd. (25) gm 0.5%; Mg, 0.2%; S, 0.4%; pH 12.08
The Best Nano Capsule (The N, 0.5%; P2O5, 0.7%; K2O, 3.9%; Ca, Thailand
International Best) 2.0%; Mg, 0.2%; S, 0.8%; Fe, 2.0%;
Network Co., Ltd. (60) capsule) Mn, 0.004%; Cu, 0.007%; Zn, 0.004%
names, it seems that the nanofertilizer products are just preparations of multiple
traditional nutrients and other additive such as ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid
(EDTA-chelating agent). Neither there was complete information regarding what
makes a product Nano (i.e., size) nor the type of material which forms the nano-
product (i.e., whether it is composite or nano-enabled bulk fertilizers, surface
modified, or pristine nanofertilizers). There are many factors that could influence
the quality of nano-products produced that is why the government of Myanmar in
the year 2016 was trying to find out support with individual characterization and
authentication of the products, possibly indicating doubts by them related to
geniuses of the products as nanofertilizers (Dimkpa and Bindraban 2016). In order
to assess the nature of nanomaterials, a particular set of criteria for the quality
check has to be developed and utilized for ratification of nanofertilizers, besides it
also requires chemical quality assessment check for all types of fertilizers (con-
centration and purity). Some of the basic and important perquisite examinations
particularly related to the authentication of nanofertilizers include (1) size (100 nm
or less), aggregates, or bulk (size>100 nm), (2) strength (to assess their finality as
nano-product or the rate of transformation before and after interconnection with
crop or soil, (3) shape, which affects the rate of termination and feasibly bioactiv-
ity (Misra et al. 2014; Prasad 2017), and (4) composition which determines the
chemical nature of nano-products (surface modified or hybrid). Except for the vol-
ume/concentration ratio, the above-mentioned criteria require a number of analyti-
cal examinations with nanoscale responsiveness that do not generally applied to
bulk materials.
5 Economic Aspect of Nanofertilizers
To invest in nanofertilizers production there are various factors such as efficiency

of nanofertilizers, cost of production, awareness among farmer community, acces-
sibility and affordability, and other related issues that should be taken into consid-
eration in establishing the industry for mass production of nano-formulations
(Pirzadah et al. 2019). Some of these issues related to economic potential of
nanofertilizers have been highlighted by many nanotechnologists in order to
enhance nanofertilizers and these are reported in both non-professional and profes-
sional news releases such as the Economist (2017) and the American Chemical
Society’s Chemical and Engineering News (2017). Nevertheless, despite the
potential of nanofertilizers, one of the most important parameters which was still
largely absent was the study of cost-effective technology and the resulting benefits.
From the industry viewpoint, economic study of nanofertilizers industry was
required that can differentiate which method for the synthesis of nanomaterial is
cost-effective and sustainable with exorbitant turnover production rate. Besides, it
was not clear at this point how the production cost of nanofertilizers in general
differentiates the production cost of traditional fertilizer and whether at what
intensity nanofertilizers would interrupt production system of conventional fertil-
izers and the cost related with such interruptions. So far, to attain grip on nanofer-
tilizers for application in huge fields and worldwide acceptance, mass production
of nanofertilizers is the need of hour besides its awareness among the farmers.
Effectively all of the principal investigations describe agricultural benefits of
nanofertilizers without enough information of the productive utilization of their
application. Adhikari et al. (2014) reported that crop utilization of P from nano
rock phosphate (RP) was at par with that of P from single superphosphate (SSP),
while yield response to P from nano RP was marginally lower than to P from SSP
but serve as a cheaper source. In addition to this, no definite confirmation of any
residual outcome on consecutive crops was done to confirm the cost-effectiveness
of the process. Delfani et al. (2014) similarly set the generating cost of 1 kg of
nano-Fe at US$800; however, the application of nano-Fe at 0.25 and 0.5 g/kg
enhanced yield of cowpea by 63% and 82%, respectively, compared to traditional
Fe. Poorly the authors did not furnished any information on the similar cost pro-
duction of the traditional Fe on the basis of which they have done a comparative
cost-benefit analysis. In a study carried out by Dimkpa and Bindraban (2016)

described an increase in yield by 24% and 52%, respectively, when egg plants are
treated with nano-CuO fertilizer compared to traditional fertilizers, it was also
important to note that a bottle of 25 g of the traditional CuO costs US$18.50 and
the nano-CuO costs US$44. This difference in yield interpreted a profit of $4637
per acre from the CuO nanofertilizers application with an expense of $26 and it has
been concluded from the above stated observations that the produced nanofertil-
izers yield better results than the traditional fertilizers. Therefore, to commercial-
ize the nano-products economic analysis of nano-products is of paramount
importance to boost the nano-agroindustry.
6 Conclusion and Future Recommendations
The above-mentioned statements revealed that the nanomaterials are not more
toxic than their ionic or micro-scale counterparts and that they can improve crops
when utilized sensibly. Hence completely utilizing the benefits of nanomaterials
needed more attention to attract the industry that brings nanotechnology into the
fertilizer management. In this regard, researchers of nanofertilizers require for
accessing the needs what the fertilizer industry requires and how their present
research viewpoint fulfilled those requirements. In carrying out such approaches,
nanofertilizers should be treated as fertilizers; however, all assessments of their
consequences on crops are performed in the same way to common fertilizers; there
was also need to aware the farmers about the ratio of application of fertilizers
associated with crops and soil; conclusion of results should be firm on investiga-
tions conducted in the growth pattern most suitable for the crops being investi-
gated; introduction of conventional crops (relevant controls) in the experimental
protocol; utilizing and investigating suitable strategies of nanofertilizers applica-
tion; and experimenting mature crops. In addition to this, nanofertilizers evalua-
tions should be done by utilizing combination of nanomaterials to imitate
traditional fertilizer application managements commonly require applications of
several nutrients (e.g., NPK) concomitantly. This was true for the concept of bal-
anced nourishment for crops, which was applicable for the world’s agricultural
regions with impoverished soils, where crops did not respond to one nutrient use
and where multiple nutrient inadequacy are ubiquitous. Principally Research and
Development (R&D) on nanofertilizers should work more on macronutrient
(NPK) which were the key nutrients for the nanofertilizers industry (Dimkpa and
Bindraban 2018). In the meantime, scientist should not only generate representa-
tive of productive nanofertilizers but also expand plan and ideas that eventually
help in the scale up process that could be sold to the industry. It has been realized
from the past that there was a need to improve the application efficiency of current
macronutrient fertilizers, efforts of R&D lead to the development of products with
unique properties such as control release and targeted release of fertilizers and
have scaled up all of these properties. With the advancements so far made to nano-
materials to produce modified nanofertilizer, it encompasses those which were

already discussed in the previous sections including modification of surfaces with
alginate and chitosan (Zhao et al. 2013; Saharan et al. 2016). The possibility of
utilizing of other bio-based and non-biased materials like aminopropyltriethoxysi-
lane, lignin, and clay was also noted in nanofertilizer model (Mukherjee et al.
2016; Pereira et al. 2015). Besides, the significant potential for producing nanofer-
tilizer macronutrient like Nhap, nano-N, or urea-Nhap imparts a powerful state-
ment for generating nanofertilizers (nano-enabled macronutrients) that should be
proved to be attractive for the industry.
Several studies have demonstrated various nanotechnologies for producing
nanofertilizer and one of the recent studies was carried out by Monreal et al. (2016)
which described bio-nano-enabled technologies in progress that would enhance the
nutrient use capacity on the basis of real-time molecular identification between root
exudates and nano encapsulated nutrients. In addition, the production of NPK fertil-
izers treated with nanomaterial Zn, Cu, Fe, B, or other micronutrient might be visu-
alized not only for enhancing the efficiency use of some macronutrients in the
preparations but also to accelerate the essential micronutrient uptake into the plant,
maintaining the nutritional quality of vegetables or grains for human consumption.
Possibly nanomaterial (micronutrient-enabled) NPK can be developed in-line by
utilizing aerosol or spray-coating colloidal technologies; however the bulk NPK
fertilizer was either mixed with nanofertilizers or sprayed by aerosol and their sur-
face were coated just before the end product evacuated from the development line,
such an in-line methods taking place in downstream part of development that would
be a supplementary technology that might not create any kind of disturbance in the
upstream process of fertilizer development. This concept of fertilizer development
was represented schematically in Fig. 3. The NPK nano-enabled micronutrient is
ready to use and all in one product that might be more costly than its traditional
components, but less costly than the different applications of micronutrients and
NPK. Regardless, the increase in yield, quality enhancement of the production, and
improvement of plant health calculated from the upgraded version must balance the
extra input cost for the farmers. Besides, environmental risks are associated with the
utilization of any agrochemicals whether traditional or nano. Remarkably nanotech-
nology nowadays established a similar insight as biotechnology in accordance with
social unwillingness to believe the technology irrespective of risk sensitivity. A
study carried out by Kah (2015) described the fact that how participants of agro-
chemical industry entirely separate themselves from the word “Nano” possibly
describing clearly why not nano-agrochemicals have been raised so far from huge
participants.
Besides, genuine evidences about positive criticism and concern and distinguish
between nutrient nanomaterials and other nanoscale materials would help to man-
age nanofertilizer acceptance and development. In this context, nanotechnologist
should proceed continuously to describe and distribute the nanofertilizer benefits in
crops based on the sensible utilization and suitable growth matrices, differentiating
existing fertilizers and sustainable utilization strategies.
Fig. 3 Simplified illustration of the production of nano-enabled bulk fertilizer (in this case NPK).
Production of NPK fertilizer occurs upstream and the finished fertilizers functionalized with sepa-
rately produced nanoparticles (NPs) of micronutrient (e.g., Zn, B, Fe) by spraying or mixing the
NPK with nanoparticles in-line, downstream
References
Adhikari T, Kundu S, Meena V, Rao AS (2014) Utilization of nano rock phosphate by maize (Zea
mays L.) crop in a vertisol of Central India. J Agric Sci Technol 4:384–394
Bahera SK, Panda RK (2009) Integrated management of irrigation water and fertilizers for wheat
crop using field experiments and simulation modeling. Agric Water Manage 96:1532–1540
Batsmanova LM, Gonchar LM, Taran NY, Okenenka AA (2013) Using a colloidal solution of
metal nanoparticles as micronutrient fertilizer for cereals. Proc Int Conf Nano-matter 2:14
Bhattacharya SS, Mandal D, Chattopadhyay GN, Majumdar K (2004) Effect of balanced fertiliza-
tion on pulse crop production in red and lateritic soils. Better Crops 88(4):52–57
Biswal SK, Nayak AK, Parida UK, Nayak PL (2012) Applications of nanotechnology in agricul-
ture and food sciences. Int J Sci Innov Discov 2:21–36
Brunnert I, Wick P, Manser P, Spohn P, Grass RN, Limbach LK, Bruinink A, Stark WJ (2006) In
vitro cytotoxicity of oxide nanoparticles: comparison to asbestos, silica, and the effect of par-
ticle solubility. Environ Sci Technol 40:4374–4381
Chemical and Engineering News (2017). http://cen.acs.org/articles/95/web/2017/02/Slow-release-
nitrogen-fertilizer-increase.html. Accessed 21 May 2017
Chen H, Seiber JN, Hotze M (2014) ASC select on nanotechnology in food and agriculture: a
perspective on implications and applications. J Agric Food Chem 62:1209–1212
Chuprova VV, Ulyanova OA, and Kulebakin VG (2004) The effect of bark–zeolite fertilizers on
mobile humus substances of chernozem and on biological productivity of Corn. In: Poster
presented Euro Soil, Freiburg, Germany, 4–12 September 2004
Coles D, Frewer LJ (2013) Nanotechnology applied to European food production: a review of ethi-
cal and regulatory issues. Trends Food Sci Technol 34:32–43
Coma V, Martial-Gros A, Garreau S, Copinet A, Salin F, Deschumps A (2002) Edible antimicrobial
films based on chitosan matrix. J Food Sci 67:1162–1169
Corradini E, de Moura MR, Mattoso LHC (2010) A preliminary study of the incorporation of NPK
fertilizer into chitosan nanoparticles. eXPRESS Polym Lett 4:509–515
Cui HX, Sun CJ, Liu Q, Jiang J, Gu W (2010) Applications of nanotechnology in agrochemical
formulation, perspectives, challenges and strategies. In: International Conference on Nanoagri,
Sao Pedro, Brazil, pp 28–33
Delfani M, Firouzabadi MB, Farrokhi N, Makarian H (2014) Some physiological responses of
black-eyed pea to iron and magnesium nanofertilizers. Commun Soil Sci Plant Anal 45:530–540
DeRosa MC, Monreal C, Schnitzer M, Walshand R, Sultan Y (2010) Nanotechnology in fertilizers.
Nat Nanotechnol 5:540–547
Dimkpa CO, Bindraban PS (2016) Micronutrients fortification for efficient agronomic production.
Rev Agron Sustainable Dev 36:7
Dimkpa CO, Bindraban PS (2018) Nanofertilizers: new products for the industry? J Agric Food
Chem 66(26):6462–6473
Frewer LJ, Norde W, Fischen ARH, Kampers FWH (eds) (2011) Nanotechnology in the agri-food
sector implications for the future. Wiley, Weinheim
Ghaly AE (2009) The black cutworm as a potential human food. Am J Biochem Biotechnol
5:210–220
Gruere G, Narrod C, Abbott L (2011) Agriculture, food and water nanotechnologies for the poor:
opportunities and constraints, policy brief 19, vol 19. International Food Policy Research
Institute, Washington DC
Gu FY, Zhang ZP, Tu SH, Lindstrom K (2009) Soil microbial biomass, crop yield and bacterial
community structures as affected by long term fertilizer treatments under wheat-rice cropping.
Eur J Soil Biol 45:239–246
Guo JS (2011) Synchrotron radiation, soft x-ray spectroscopy and nanomaterials. Int J Nanotechnol
1:193–225
Guo MY, Liu MZ, Zhan FL, Wu L (2005) Preparation and properties of a slow-release membrane-
encapsulated urea fertilizer with super absorbent and moisture preservation. Ind Eng Chem
Res 44:4206–4211
Gutierrez FJ, Mussons ML, Gaton P, Rojo R (2011) Nanotechnology and food industry. In:
Scientific, health and social aspects of the food industry. In Tech, Rijeka
Jinghua G (2004) Synchrotron radiation, soft X-ray spectroscopy and nano-materials. J Nanotech
1(1–2):193–225
Kah M (2015) Nanopesticides and nanofertilizers: emerging contaminants or opportunities for risk
mitigation? Front Chem 3:64
Khodakovskaya M, Dervishi E, Mahmood M, Xu Y, Li Z, Watanbe F, Biris AS (2009) Carbon
nanotubes are able to penetrate plant seed coat and dramatically affect seed germination and
plant growth. ACS Nano 3:3221–3227
Kottegoda N, Munaweera I, Madusanka N, Karunaratne V (2011) A green slow-release fertilizer
composition based on urea-modified hydroxyapatite nanoparticles encapsulated wood. Curr
Sci 101:73–78
Liu DM, Trocznski T, Tseng WJ (2001) Water-based-sol-gel synthesis of hydroxyapatite: process
development. Biomaterials 22:1721–1730
Liu M, Liang R, Liu F, Niu A (2006) Synthesis of a slow release and superabsorbent nitrogen fertil-
izer and its properties. Polym Adv Tech 17:430–438
Liu R, Lal R (2015) Potentials of engineered nanoparticles as fertilizers for increasing agronomic
productions. Sci Total Environ 514:131–139
Mandal KG, Hati KM, Misra AK (2009) Biomass yield and energy analysis of soybean production
in relation to fertilizer-NPK and organic manure. Biomass Bioenergy 33:1670–1679
Manikanadan A, Subramanian KS (2014) Fabrication and characterisation of nanoporous zeolite
based N fertilizer. Afr J Agric Res 9:276–284
Meena DS, Gautam C, Patidar OP, Meena HM, Prakasha G, Vishwajith (2017) Nano fertilizer is a
new way to increase nutrient use efficiency in crop production. Int J of Agri Sci 9(7):3831–3833
Misra SK, Nuseibeh S, Dybowska A, Berhanu D, Tetley TD, Valsami-Jones E (2014) Comparative
study using spheres, rods and spindle-shaped nanoplatelets on dispersion stability, dissolution
and toxicity of CuO nanomaterials. Nanotoxicology 8:422–432
Monreal CM, DeRosa M, Mallubhotla SC, Bindraban PS, Dimkpa CO (2016) Nanotechnologies
for increasing the crop use efficiency of fertilizer-micronutrients. Biol Fertil Soils 52:423–437
Mukherjee A, Sun Y, Morelius E, Tamez C, Bandyopadhyay S, Niu G, White JC, Peralta-Videa
JR, Gardea-Torresdey JL (2016) Differential toxicity of bare and hybrid ZnO nanoparticles in
green pea (Pisum sativum L.): a life cycle study. Front Plant Sci 6:1242
Naderi MR, Danesh-Shahraki A (2013) Nanofertilizers and their role in sustainable agriculture. Int
J Agric Crop Sci 5:2229–2232
Nel A, Xia T, Madlerl LN (2006) Toxic potential of materials at the nanolevel. Science 311:622–627
No HK, Meyers SP, Prinyawiwatkul W, Xu Z (2007) Applications of chitosan for improvement of
quality and shelf life of foods: a review. J Food Sci 72:87–100
Pereira EI, da Cruz CCT, Solomon A, Le A, Cavigelli A, Ribeiro C (2015) Novel slow-release
nanocomposite nitrogen fertilizers: the impact of polymers on nanocomposite properties and
function. Ind Eng Chem Res 54:3717–3725
Perez-de-Luque A, Hermosin MC (2013) Nanotechnology and its use in agriculture. In: Bagchi
D, Bagchi M, Moriyana H, Shahidi F (eds) Biotechnology: a revolution food, biomedical and
health sciences. Wiley, West Sussex, pp 299–405
Pijls L, Ashwell M, Lambert J (2009) EURRECA – a network of excellence to align European
micronutrient recommendations. Food Chem 113:748–753
Nanobiotechnology in bioformulations. Springer, Cham, pp 381–394. Nanotechnology in the
Life Sciences
cerns and future aspect. Afr J Biotechnol 13:705–713
Prasad R (2017) Fungal nanotechnology: applications in agriculture, industry, and medicine.
Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd., Singapore. (ISBN 978-3-319-68423-9)
Quasem JM, Mazahreh AS, Abu-alruz K (2009) Nano fertilizers is a new way to increase nutrients
use efficiency in crop production. Am J Appl Sci 6:888–896
Rai V, Hapuarachchi HC, Ng LC, Soh SH, Leo YS, Toh CH (2012) Ultrasensitive cDNA detection
of dengue virus RNA using electrochemical Nanoporous membrane-based biosensor. PLoS
One 7(8):42346
Ramesh K, Biswas AK, Soma Sundaram J, Subba Rao A (2010) Nanoporous zeolites in farming:
current status and issues ahead. Curr Sci 99(6):25
Saharan V, Kumaraswamy RV, Choudhary RC, Kumari S, Pal A, Raliya R, Biswas P (2016)
Cu-chitosan nanoparticle mediated sustainable approach to enhance seedling growth in maize
by mobilizing reserved food. J Agric Food Chem 64:6148–6155
Saigusa M (2000) Broadcast application versus band application of polyolefin- coated fertilizer on
green peppers grown on Andisol. J Plant Nutr 23:1485–1493
Santoso D, Lefroy RDB, Blair GJ (1995) Sulfur and phosphorus dynamics in an acid soil/crop
system. Aust J Soil Res 33:113–124
Scott N, Chen H (2012) Nanoscale science and engineering for agriculture and food systems.
National planning workshop, Washington DC, 18–19
Servin A, Elmer W, Mukherjee A, De La Torre-Roche R, Hamdi H, White JC, Bindraban PS,
Dimkpa CO (2015) A review of the use of engineered nanomaterials to suppress plant disease
and enhance crop yield. J Nanopart Res 17:92
Sharmila R (2011) Nutrient release pattern of nanofertilizer formulation. Ph.D (Agri.) Thesis,
Tamil Nadu Agricultural University, Coimbatore
Sonkaria S, Aln SH, Khare V (2012) Nanotechnology and its impact on food and nutrition, a
review. Recent Pat Food Nutr Agric 4:8–18
Subramanian KS, Paulraj C, Natarajan S (2008) Nanotechnological approaches in nutrient man-
agement. In: Nanotechnology Applications in Agriculture. TNAU Agritech Portal, Coimbatore,
pp 37–42
Teodorescu M, Lungu A, Stanescu PO, Neamtu C (2009) Preparation and properties of novel slow
release NPK agrochemicals formulations based on poly(acrylic acid) hydrogels and liquid fer-
tilizer. Ind Eng Chem Res 48:6527–6534
The Economist (2017). http://www.economist.com/news/science-and-technology/21717024-hold-
ing-fast-how-stop-fertiliser-being-washed-away-rain. Accessed 21 May 2017
Wilson MA, Tran NH, Milev AS, Kannangara GSK, Volk H, Lu GQM (2008) Nanomaterials in
soils. Geoderma 146:291–302
Zhao L, Hernandez-Viezcas JA, Peralta-Videa JR, Bandyopadhyay S, Peng B, Munoz B, Keller
AA, Gardea-Torresdey JL (2013) ZnO nanoparticle fate in soil and zinc bioaccumulation in
corn plants (Zea mays) influenced by alginate. Environ Sci Processes Impacts 15:260
Embodiment of Nanobiotechnology
in Agriculture: An Overview
Tareq A. Wani, Gulzar A. Rather, Mudasar Ahmad, and Zahoor A. Kaloo
1 Introduction
Nanotechnology being an emerging field has gained a marvelous role in agriculture

sector and has brought radical changes in agricultural production. The development
of new and novel nanotech-based equipment may help to augment efficiency and
overcome challenges faced by the modern agricultural industry. Agriculture prac-
tice makes widespread use of industrially generated chemicals to rouse growth and
inhibit pests, insects, and disease (Yunlong and Smit 1994). Recently, nanotechnol-
ogy has proved to have the potential to improve the agri-food sector, minimizing
adverse human health problems, agricultural practices on environment and improv-
ing food productivity and security required by the predicted rise in global popula-
tion, while promoting social and economic equity. In this backdrop, we select and
report on recent trends in nano-material based systems and nano-devices that could
benefit the food supply chain specifically on sustainable intensification and manage-
ment of soil and wastes. Agriculture is always highly important and most stable
sector to boost nation’s economy as it provides raw materials for feed and food
industries and companies. Limited natural resources such as water, land, soil, etc.,
and the growing population in the world has forced scientific community to develop
green approaches for the sustainable agriculture development (Mukhopadhyay
2014). Agricultural nutrient balance is differed perceptibly with economic growth,
and especially from this surmise, the development of the soil fertility is very much
significant in developing countries (Campbell et al. 2014). The growth of agricul-
ture is necessary for the eradication of poverty and hunger in order to get a hold on
T. A. Wani (*) · M. Ahmad · Z. A. Kaloo

Department of Botany, University of Kashmir, Srinagar, India
G. A. Rather
Plant Biotechnology Division, CSIR-Indian Institute of Integrative Medicine, Jammu, India

114 T. A. Wani et al.
the present situation. Therefore, we should have to take one bold step for agriculture
development. In present world, most of the population lies under below poverty
levels, scattered across the rural areas where agriculture enlargement has not been
so effective. Therefore, new technology should have to be adopted that decidedly
focuses on getting better agricultural production (Yunlong and Smit 1994). The
agriculture development also depends on the social inclusion, health, climate
changes, energy, ecosystem processes, natural resources, good supremacy, etc.,
which must be documented in specific target oriented goals (Thornhill et al. 2016).
No doubt that the sustainable growth of agriculture totally depends on the new and
innovative techniques like nanotechnology. If we like to go in the year 1959
Feynman’s lecture on “Plenty of room at the bottom,” from this very day, the nano-
process is in underway (Feynman 1996). Later on Professor Norio Tanaguchi pro-
posed the actual term of nanotechnology (Bulovic et al. 2004; Gibney 2015).
Subsequently, nanotechnology developed in more dramatic ways, as more recent
appliances develop to isolate nanomaterials in more precise ways. Additionally, the
number of publications related to the term of “nano” was also grown exponentially.
About 14,000 documents with word nanotechnology in food or agriculture were
listed until 2016 pointing towards the importance gained by this field. Also about
2707 patents matched this criteria are found in world patent database. The world
market size of nanotechnology in 2002 was about US$ 110.6 billion and predicted
to grow to US$ 891.1 billion in 2015 according to analysis of Helmut Kaiser
Consultancy. In the present century, there is a big demand for fast, reliable, and low-
cost systems for the detection, monitoring, and diagnosis for biological host mole-
cules in agricultural sectors (Vidotti et al. 2011; Sagadevan and Periasamy 2014).
The application of chemically synthesized nanomaterials nowadays is considered as
toxic in the nature; however, biosynthesis of nanomaterials using microbial or
phyto-engineering approach is safe and is considered as green nanotechnology
(Prasad et al. 2014). Green nanotechnology is a safe process, energy efficient,
reduces waste and reduces greenhouse gas emissions. Use of renewable materials in
production of such products is beneficial, thus these processes have low influence
on the environment (Prasad et al. 2014, 2016). Since the last decade, there is a para-
digm shift toward the green synthesis of nano-particles and its implementation in
agro-industry. Still it is not clear how the environmental sustainability of green
nanotechnology will be achieved in future? These risks must be mitigated in
advanced green nanotechnology solutions (Kandasamy and Prema 2015).
The development of the high-tech agricultural system with use of engineered
smart nano-tools could be excellent strategy to make a revolution in agricultural
practices, and thus reduce and/or eliminate the influence of modern agriculture on
the environment as well as to enhance both the quality and quantity of yields
(Sekhon 2014; Liu and Lal 2015). Further the development of biosensors in the
smart agro-food sector is also a good field for exploitation of many strengths of
nanotechnology (Sertova 2015; Fraceto et al. 2016). Additionally, use of nanomate-
rials let to miniaturize many biosensors to small and compact/smart devices such as
nanosensors and other nano-systems that are very important in biochemical analysis
(Viswanathan and Radecki 2008; Sertova 2015; Fraceto et al. 2016). Keeping in
Embodiment of Nanobiotechnology in Agriculture: An Overview 115
Fig. 1 Flowchart
involving the convergence
of nanotechnology and
biotechnology results in
nanobiotechnology, which
entails knowledge of
structural and genetic
engineering
view of the above facts, here we summarize encapsulation of nanoparticles and how
nanotechnology boosts the agriculture sector besides its negative impact on the
environment (Fig. 1).
2 Micro- and Nano-encapsulation
Encapsulation is defined as the process in which the given object is surrounded by a

coating or embedded in homogeneous or heterogeneous matrix, thus this process
results in capsules with many useful properties (Rodríguez et al. 2016). The benefits
of encapsulation methods are for protection of substances/objects from adverse
environments, for controlled release, and for precision targeting (Ezhilarasi et al.
2012; Ozdemir and Kemerli 2016). Depending on size and shape of capsules differ-
ent encapsulation technologies are mentioned, while the (macro) encapsulation/
coating results in capsules in macro-scale, whereas the micro- and nano-
encapsulation will give particles in micro- and nano-scale size (Ozdemir and
Kemerli 2016). Nano-capsules are vesicular systems in which the substances are
confined to a cavity consisting of an inner liquid core enclosed by a polymeric mem-
brane (Couvreur et al. 1995). Recently, NPs are getting significant attention for
delivery of drugs, for protection and increase in bioavailability of food components
or nutraceuticals, for food fortification, and for the self-healing of several materials,
and also it possesses big prospective phenomenon in plant science (Ozdemir and
Kemerli 2016). Furthermore, the development of this technology will build more
possibility to create new drugs with precise therapeutic action on embattled tissues.
Nano-capsules can potentially be used as MRI-guided nanorobots or nanobots
(Vartholomeos et al. 2011). Recently, a wide range of potential applications of nan-
otechnology have been envisaged also in agriculture, leading to intense research at
both academic and industrial levels (Parisi et al. 2015). Indeed, the unique proper-
ties of materials at nano-scale make them suitable candidates for the design and
development of novel tools in support of a sustainable agriculture. Some of the main
applications of these nano-tools in agriculture are reported in the following
paragraphs.
3 Precision Farming
The process of maximizing crop yields and minimizing the usage of pesticides,
fertilizers, and herbicides through efficient monitoring procedures is referred to as
precision farming. Precision farming utilizes remote sensing devices, computers,
and global satellite positioning systems to analyze various environmental condi-
tions in order to determine the growth of plants under these conditions and identify
problems related to crops and their growing environments. Precision farming helps
determine plant development, soil conditions, usage of water and chemicals, fertil-
izers and seeding and controls environmental pollution to a minimum extent by
reducing agricultural waste (Prasad et al. 2017; Pirzadah et al. 2019). The imple-
mentation of nanotechnology in the form of small sensors and monitoring devices
will create a positive impact on the future use of precision farming methodologies.
Nanotech-enabled systems help in increasing the use of autonomous sensors that
are linked into GPS systems to provide efficient monitoring services focused on
crop growth and soil conditions. The usage of smart sensors in precision farming
will result in increased agricultural productivity by providing farmers with accurate
information that will enable them to make accurate decisions related to plant growth
and soil suitability.
4 Nano Delivery Systems
There are many regulatory restrictions placed on pesticides in agriculture today.

Pesticides such as DDT, which have caused extreme environmental hazards, have
increased public and regulatory awareness of the use of chemicals in farming, shift-
ing the industry’s focus on to the use of integrated pest management systems, com-
bining smarter and more targeted use of chemicals with granular monitoring of
plant health. These agricultural systems can make excellent use of nanotech-enabled
“smart” devices that can perform a dual role of being a preventive and early warning
system (Singh et al. 2017). These devices can identify plant-related health issues
even before they become visible to the farmers and simultaneously provide reme-
dial measures. User-friendly and eco-friendly nano delivery systems for nutrients
and pesticides have started to find their place in the market. These can allow the use
of pesticides with the absolute minimum risk of environmental damage. Companies
have implemented nano-emulsions in commercial pesticide products. Syngenta, a
leading agrochemical corporation, produces a quick-release microencapsulated
product, which is available under the name Karate® ZEON (Misra et al. 2016).
5 Systems for Sustainable Intensification in Agriculture
Sustainable intensification is a concept related to a production system aiming to

increase the yield without adverse environmental impact while cultivating the same
agricultural area (The Royal Society 2009). This paradigm provides a framework to
evaluate the selection of the best combination of approaches to agricultural produc-
tion considering the influence of the current biophysical, social, cultural, and eco-
nomic situation (Garnett and Godfray 2012). In this context, novel nanomaterials
based on the use of inorganic, polymeric, and lipid nanoparticles synthesized by
exploiting different techniques (e.g., emulsification, ionic gelation, polymerization,
oxidoreduction, etc.) have been developed to increase productivity. They can find
application, as an example, for the development of intelligent nano-systems for the
immobilization of nutrients and their release in soil. Such systems have the advan-
tage to minimize leaching, while improving the uptake of nutrients by plants, and to
mitigate eutrophication by reducing the transfer of nitrogen to groundwater (Liu
and Lal 2015). Furthermore, it is noteworthy to mention that nanomaterials could
also be exploited to improve structure and function of pesticides by increasing solu-
bility, enhancing resistance against hydrolysis and photodecomposition, and/or by
providing a more specific- and controlled-release toward target organisms (Mishra
and Singh 2015; Grillo et al. 2016; Nuruzzaman et al. 2016).
6 Soil Quality Improvement Through Nanotechnology
Hydrogels, nanoclays, and nanozeolites have been reported to enhance the water-
holding capacity of soil (Sekhon 2014), hence acting as a slow-release source of
water, reducing the hydric shortage periods during crop season. Applications of
such systems are favorable for both agricultural purposes and reforestation of
degraded areas. For example; organic polymer and carbon nanotubes and inorganics
like nano-metals and metal oxides nanomaterials have also been used to absorb
environmental contaminants (Khin et al. 2012), increasing soil remediation capacity
and reducing times and costs of the treatments.
7 Nanomaterials as Agents to Stimulate Plant Growth
Carbon nanotubes and nanoparticles of Au, SiO2, ZnO, and TiO2 can contribute to
ameliorate development of plants by enhancing elemental uptake and use of nutri-
ents (Khota et al. 2012). However, the real impact of nanomaterials on plants
depends on their composition, concentration, size, surface charge, and physiochem-
ical properties, besides the susceptibility of the plant species (Lambreva et al. 2015).
The development of new protocols and the use of different analytical techniques
(such as microscopy, magnetic resonance imaging, and fluorescence spectroscopy)
could considerably contribute to understand the interactions between plants and
nanomaterials.
8 anagement of the Food Supply Chain Using

M
Nano-tech Approach
Nanotechnology can find applications also in the development of analytical devices

dedicated to the control of quality, bio/security, and safety not only in agriculture,
but also along the food supply chain (Valdes et al. 2009). In this context, nanosen-
sors represent a powerful tool with advanced and improved features, compared to
existing analytical sensors and biosensors. Nanosensors are defined as analytical
devices having at least one sensing dimension no greater than 100 nm, fabricated for
monitoring physico-chemical properties in places otherwise difficult to reach. They
have unique surface chemistry, distinct thermal, electrical, and optical properties,
useful to enhance sensitivities, reduce response times, and improve detection limits,
and can be used in multiplexed systems (Yao et al. 2014). Considering the huge
amount of research in this area, real applications of nanosensors for field analysis
are unexpectedly scarce, implying the potential for a new market. In this perspec-
tive, nanotechnologies could enhance biosensor performance to allow real applica-
tions in agri-food industry. Indeed, thanks to important progresses in nanofabrication,
laboratory analytical techniques, such as surface plasmon resonance, mass spec-
trometry, chromatography, or electrophoresis chips, can support the development of
viable sensor components. However, the real need of the market is the realization of
automated embedded systems which integrate bio-sensing components with micro/
nanofluidics, data management hardware, and remote control by wireless networks.
This is a key issue for nanotechnology, which can provide the decisive approaches
as well as novel nanomaterials for the realization of bio-sensing devices
(Scognamiglio 2013). Indeed, as described by Mousavi and Rezaei (2011)
“Nanosensors help farmers in maintaining farm with precise control and report
timely needs of plants.” Thus, it will be mandatory to address research efforts to the
development of nanosensors to aid decision-making in crop monitoring, accurate
analysis of nutrients and pesticides in soil, or for maximizing the efficiency of water
use for a smart agriculture. In this context, nanosensors could demonstrate their
potential in managing all the phases of the food supply chain, from crop cultivation
and harvesting to food processing, transportation, packaging, and distribution
(Scognamiglio et al. 2014). Among them, nanosensors for dynamic measurement of
soil parameters (pH and nutrients, residual pesticides in crop and soil, and soil
humidity), detection of pathogens, and prediction of nitrogen uptake are only few
examples to foster a sustainable farming (Bellingham 2011). Controlled-release
mechanisms via nano-scale carriers monitored by nanosensors integrated in plat-
forms employing wireless signals will avoid overdose of agricultural chemicals and
minimize inputs of fertilizers and pesticides during the course of cultivations,
improving productivity and reducing waste. Networks of nanosensors located
throughout cultivated fields will assure a real time and comprehensive monitoring
of the crop growth, furnishing effective high-quality data for best management prac-
tices (El Beyrouthya and El Azzi 2014).
Nanotechnologists are hoping that this technology will transform the entire food
industry by bringing about changes in the production, processing, packaging, trans-
portation, and consumption of food. Usage of nanotechnology in these processes
ensures safety of food products, thus creates a healthy food culture and enhances the
nutritional quality of foods. Smart food packaging systems can be developed using
nanotechnology that in turn increases the shelf life of food products by developing
active antifungal and antimicrobial surfaces, improving heat-resistance and mechan-
ical properties, modifying the permeation behavior of foils, and detecting and sig-
naling biochemical and microbiological changes. A number of companies have
started to develop Smart Packaging systems—one such company is Bayer Polymers,
who developed the Durethan KU2-2601 packaging film whose key purpose is to
prevent drying of food content and protect the food content from oxygen and mois-
ture. This packaging film is made from a number of silicate nanoparticles. Nano-
capsules are added into food products in order to deliver nutrients, and nanoparticles
when added to food increase the absorption of nutrients. An increasing number of
companies are researching on additives that can be easily absorbed by the body and
increase product shelf life. Bio-delivery Sciences International developed coiled
nanoparticles called nano-cochleates that deliver nutrients and omega fatty acids to
cells without causing any changes to the taste and color of food (Ravichandran
2010). The automation of irrigation systems is also a crucial requirement of smart
agriculture, mainly in a scenario of water shortage. In this regard, sensor technology
has the potential to maximize the efficiency of water use. Nanosensors estimating
soil water tension in real time may be coupled with autonomous irrigation control-
lers. This feature allows a sustainable irrigation management based on drying soil,
otherwise an approach too difficult for farmers because it involves evaluation of
climate and crop growth aspects of high complexity (de Medeiros et al. 2001).
Furthermore, nanosensors find also application in fast, sensitive, and cost-effective
detection of different targets to ensure food quality, safety, freshness, authenticity,
and traceability along the entire food supply chain. Surely, nanosensors represent
one of the emerging technologies challenging the assessment of food quality and
safety, being able to provide smart monitoring of food components (e.g., sugars,
amino acid, alcohol, vitamins, and minerals) and contaminants (e.g., pesticides,
heavy metals, toxins, and food additives). Food quality and food safety control rep-
resents a crucial effort not only to obtain a healthy food, but also to avoid huge
waste of food products. The potential of nanosensor can also be demonstrated by the
last trends on intelligent or smart packaging to monitor the freshness properties of
food and check the integrity of the packages during transport, storage, and display
in markets (Vanderroost et al. 2014). Many intelligent packaging involve nanosen-
sors as monitoring systems to measure physical parameters (humidity, pH, tempera-
ture, light exposure), to reveal gas mixtures (e.g., oxygen and carbon dioxide), to
detect pathogens and toxins, or to control freshness (e.g., ethanol, lactic acid, acetic
acid) and decomposition (e.g., putrescine, cadaverine).
9 Nanotechnology and Agricultural

Sustainable Development
The nanotechnology plays an important role in the productivity through control of

nutrients (Mukhopadhyay 2014) as well as it can also participate in the monitoring
of water quality and pesticides for sustainable development of agriculture (Prasad
et al. 2014). Properties of NPs that include chemical composition, shape, surface
structure, surface charge, behavior, extent of particle aggregation (clumping) or dis-
aggregation, etc. have the influence on toxicity (Ion et al. 2010). For this reason
even nanomaterials of the same chemical composition that have different sizes or
shapes can exhibit their different toxicity. The implication of the nanotechnology
research in the agricultural sector is becoming a necessary key factor for the sustain-
able developments as it leads to the production of nanofertilizers and nano-pesticides
that helps to enhance production yield (Tables 1 and 2). In the agri-food areas perti-
nent applications of nanotubes, fullerenes, biosensors, controlled delivery systems,
nano-filtration, etc. were observed (Ion et al. 2010; Sabir et al. 2014). This technol-
ogy was proved to be as good in resources management of agricultural field, drug
delivery mechanisms in plants, and helps to maintain the soil fertility. Moreover, it
is being also evaluated steadily in the use of biomass and agricultural waste as well
as in food processing and packaging system as well as risk assessment (Floros et al.
2010). Recently, nanosensors are widely applied in the precision agriculture for
environmental monitoring of contamination in the soils and in the water (Ion et al.
2010). Nanomaterials not only directly catalyze degradation of waste and toxic
materials but it also aids to improve the efficiency of microorganisms in degradation
of waste and toxic materials. It is an interesting phenomena in considering the
nano–nano interaction to remove the toxic component of the agricultural soil and
make it sustainable (Ion et al. 2010; Dixit et al. 2015). The recent development of a
nano-encapsulated pesticide formulation has slow-releasing properties with
enhanced solubility, specificity, permeability, and stability (Bhattacharyya et al.
2016). These assets are mainly achieved through either protecting the encapsulated
active ingredients from premature degradation or increasing their pest control effi-
cacy for a longer period. Formulation of nano-encapsulated pesticides led to reduce
Table 1 List of some commercially available nanofertilizers

Commercial product Content Company
Nano-Gro™ Plant growth regulator and immunity Agro Nanotechnology
enhancer Corp., FL, United States
Nano Green Extracts of corn, grain, soybeans, potatoes, Agro Nanotechnology
coconut, and palm Corp., FL, United States
Nano-Ag Answer® Microorganism, sea kelp, and mineral Urth Agriculture, CA,
electrolyte United States
Biozar Combination of organic materials, Fanavar Nano-
Nano-Fertilizer micronutrients, and macromolecules Pazhoohesh Markazi
Company, Iran
Nano Max NPK Multiple organic acids chelated with major JU Agri Sciences Pvt.
Fertilizer nutrients, amino acids, organic carbon, Ltd., Janakpuri, New
organic micro nutrients/trace elements, Delhi, India
vitamins, and probiotic
Master Nano Water-soluble liquid chitosan, organic acid Pannaraj Intertrade,
Chitosan Organic and salicylic acids, phenolic compounds Thailand
Fertilizer
TAG NANO (NPK, Proteino-lacto-gluconate chelated with Tropical Agrosystem
PhoS, Zinc, Cal, etc.) micronutrients, vitamins, probiotics, seaweed India (P) Ltd., India
fertilizers extracts, humic acid
the dosage of pesticides and human beings exposure to them which is environment-
friendly for crop protection (Nuruzzaman et al. 2016), thus developing non-toxic
and promising pesticide delivery systems for increasing global food production
while reducing the negative environmental impacts to ecosystem (Bhattacharyya
et al. 2016; Grillo et al. 2016).
10 Identification of Gaps and Obstacles
Despite considerable advances in identifying possible applications of nanotechnol-

ogy in agriculture, many issues remain to be resolved in the near future before this
technology may make significant contributions to the area of agriculture. Some of
the main aspects that require further attention are: (1) development of specific
hybrid carriers for delivering active agents including nutrients, pesticides, and fertil-
izers in order to maximize their efficiency following the principles of green chem-
istry and environmental sustainability (De Oliveira et al. 2014); (2) design of
processes easily up-scalable at industrial level; (3) comparison of effects of nano-
formulations/nano-systems with existing commercial products in order to demon-
strate real practical advantages; (4) acquisition of knowledge and developments of
methods for risk and life-cycle assessment of nanomaterials, nano-pesticides,
nanofertilizers, as well as assessment of the impacts (e.g., phytotoxic effects) on
non-target organisms such as plants, soil microbiota, and bees; (5) advances in the
regulations about the use of nanomaterials (Amenta et al. 2015). In this context, the
Table 2 List of commercially available nano-pesticides/nanoherbicides

Carrier system Agent Purpose Method
Chitosan Imazapic and Imazapyr Cytotoxicity assays Encapsulation
Silica Piracetam, pentoxifylline, Perfused brain tissue Suspension
and pyridoxine
Alginate Imidacloprid Cytotoxicity, sucking Emulsion
pest (leafhoppers)
Polyacetic acid- Imidacloprid Decrease the lethal Encapsulation
polyethylene glycol- concentration
polyacetic acid
Carboxymethyl Methomyl Control release for Encapsulation
chitosan longer time period
Chitosan/ Paraquat Lower cyto- and Encapsulation
tripolyphosphate genotoxicity
Chitosan/ Chitosan, saponin, CuSO4 Antifungal activity Cross-linking
tripolyphosphate
chitosan-saponin
chitosan-Cu
Xyloglucan/poloxamer Tropicamide Have significantly Encapsulation
higher corneal
permeation across
excised goat cornea,
less toxic, and
non-irritant
Wheat gluten Ethofumesate Reduce its diffusivity Entrapment/
extrusion
Alginate Azadirachtin Slower release Encapsulation
Surfactants/oil/water Glyphosate Increase in Emulsion
bio-efficacy,
alleviating the
negative effect of
pesticide
formulations into
environment
Alginate/chitosan Paraquat Increased period of Pre-gelation of
action of the alginate then
chemical on precise complexation
targets while between alginate
reducing problems of and chitosan
ecological toxicity
Polyhydroxybutyrate- Atrazine Decreased Encapsulation
co-hydroxyvalerate genotoxicity and
increased
biodegradability
Organic-inorganic 2,4-Dichlorophenoxyacetate Control release Self-assembly
nano-hybrid
Fig. 2 Timescale for development of atrazine nano-pesticide
progress made in the exploitation of nano-pesticides (such as atrazine) represents a

useful case study to identify the main parameters necessary to predict the behavior
of nanomaterials in the environment (Grillo et al. 2012) (Fig. 2). In the study of the
atrazine-nano-pesticide system, care was taken to understand the mechanisms of
interaction with both target, mustard (Oliveira et al. 2015a), and non-target organ-
isms, maize (Oliveira et al. 2015b), and risk assessment analyses were also consid-
ered (Kah et al. 2014). However, future case studies are necessary in order to address
the safety of workers and consumers with respect to food produced using nanoma-
terials and nanoparticles. The implementation of nanotechnology in agriculture also
requires the development of techniques capable of quantifying engineered nanopar-
ticles at the concentrations present in different environmental compartments (Sadik
et al. 2014). Currently available methods are not always adequate to understand the
dynamics of nanomaterials in the environment, their interactions with target and
non-target organisms, or the occurrence of synergistic effects. These methodologi-

cal advances allow a life-cycle assessment of the new developed nanomaterials
(Parisi et al. 2015). Moreover, studies on methodologies able to evaluate the arise of
resistance mechanisms to nanomaterials by certain microorganisms should be
undertaken. As a whole, the newly developed analytical methodologies would sup-
port predictive models to characterize, localize, and quantify engineered nanomate-
rials in the environments. In this context, knowledge exchange among scientists
from different research fields would be essential (Malysheva et al. 2015). Besides,
eco-toxicological research would increasingly focus attention on the environmental
consequence of the materials and complexity of natural systems. Extensive research
would be necessary to determine delayed impacts of environmental exposure to NPs
and to help determine possible adaptive mechanisms (Cox et al. 2017; Singh et al.
2017). More research on bioaccumulation in the food chain and interaction of NPs
with other pollutants in the environment should be focused. NPs in plants enter in
cellular system; thereby they get translocated through the shoot and are accumu-
lated in various aerial parts of the plant. Also, the possibility of their cycling in the
ecosystem increases through various trophic levels. The accumulation of NPs in
plants is problematic as it affects various physiological activities of the plant like
rate of transpiration, respiration, altering the process of photosynthesis, and inter-
feres with translocation of food materials (Du et al. 2017). The degree of toxicity is
linked to this surface and to the surface properties of the NPs. The eco-toxicity of
NPs is thus very important as it creates a direct link between the adverse effects of
NPs and the organisms including microorganisms, plants, and other organisms
including humans at various trophic levels (Tripathi et al. 2016).
11 Recent Developments in Agro-nanotechnology
With nanotechnology gaining recognition in the agricultural and food sectors, sci-
entists have recently showcased their nanotechnology expertise to farmers in
Africa. Three significant innovations were demonstrated: the scientists have
planned to develop a plastic storage bag lined with nanoparticles that are capable
of reacting with oxygen and preventing cassava from rotting. In this way, the
African farmers can prolong the shelf life of cassava and prevent wastage of this
vegetable. Secondly, milk container was designed with a nano-patterned, antimi-
crobial coating that helps the dairy farmers in Africa to preserve milk for a pro-
longed time period as they take almost a whole day to reach the cooling centers.
These nanotechnology-based milk containers replace the currently used plain plas-
tic bags. Besides, they have also planned to develop nano-patterned paper sensors
to detect bovine pregnancy in order to enable the dairy farmers determine if their
cows will run dry without milk due to udder infection or pregnancy (Fraceto et al.
2016; Prasad et al. 2017).
12 Conclusions and Future Perspective
Considering the great challenges we will be facing, in particular due to a growing

global population and climate change, the application of nanotechnologies as well
as the introduction of nanomaterials in agriculture potentially can greatly contribute
to address the issue of sustainability. In fact, the efficient use of fertilizers and pes-
ticides can be enhanced by the use of nano-scale carriers and compounds, reducing
the amount to be applied without impairing productivity. Nanotechnologies can also
have an impact on the reduction of waste, both contributing to a more efficient pro-
duction as well as to the reuse of waste, while nanosensors technology can encour-
age the diffusion of precision agriculture, for an efficient management of resources,
including energy (FAO and WHO 2013). However, with the application of all new
technologies, there is the need to perform a reliable risk-benefit assessment, as well
as a full cost accounting evaluation. In the case of nanotechnologies, this requires
also the development of reliable methods for the characterization and quantification
of nanomaterials in different matrices and for the evaluation of their impact on the
environment (Servin and White 2016) as well as on human health (EFSA Scientific
Committee 2011). Furthermore, it is very important to engage all stakeholders,
including non-governmental and consumer associations, in an open dialogue to
acquire consumer acceptance and public support for this technology.
References
Amenta V, Aschberger K, Arena M, Bouwmeester H, Moniz FB, Brandhoff P et al (2015)

Regulatory aspects of nanotechnology in the agri/feed/food sector in EU and non-EU coun-
tries. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol 73:463–476
Bellingham BK (2011) Proximal soil sensing. Vadose Zone J 10:1342–1342
Bhattacharyya A, Duraisamy P, Govindarajan M, Buhroo AA, Prasad R (2016) Nano-biofungicides:
emerging trend in insect pest control. In: Prasad R (ed) Advances and applications through
fungal nanobiotechnology. Springer International Publishing, Cham, pp 307–319
Bulovic V, Mandell A, Perlman A (2004) Molecular memory device. US 20050116256 A1
Campbell BM, Thornton P, Zougmoré R, van Asten P, Lipper L (2014) Sustainable intensification:
what is its role in climate smart agriculture? Curr Opin Environ Sustain 8:39–43
Couvreur P, Dubernet C, Puisieux F (1995) Controlled drug delivery with nanoparticles: current
possibilities and future trends. Eur J Pharm Biopharm 41:2–13
Cox A, Venkatachalam P, Sahi S, Sharma N (2017) Reprint of: silver and titanium dioxide nanopar-
ticle toxicity in plants: a review of current research. Plant Physiol Biochem 110:33–49
de Medeiros GA, Arruda FB, Sakai E, Fujiwara M (2001) The influence of crop canopy on
evapotranspiration and crop coefficient of beans (Phaseolus vulgaris L.). Agric Water Manag
49:211–224
de Oliveira JL, Campos EV, Bakshi M, Abhilash PC, Fraceto LF (2014) Application of nanotech-
nology for the encapsulation of botanical insecticides for sustainable agriculture: prospects and
promises. Biotechnol Adv 32:1550–1561
Dixit R, Malaviya WD, Pandiyan K, Singh UB, Sahu A et al (2015) Bioremediation of heavy met-
als from soil and aquatic environment: an overview of principles and criteria of fundamental
processes. Sustainability 7:2189–2212
Du W, Tan W, Peralta-Videa JR, Gardea-Torresdey JL, Ji R, Yin Y et al (2017) Interaction of metal

oxide nanoparticles with higher terrestrial plants: physiological and biochemical aspects. Plant
Physiol Biochem 110:210–225
EFSA Scientific Committee (2011) Scientific opinion on guidance on the risk assessment of the
application of nanoscience and nanotechnologies in the food and feed chain. EFSA J 9:2140
El Beyrouthya M, El Azzi D (2014) Nanotechnologies: novel solutions for sustainable agriculture.
Adv Crop Sci Technol 2:e118
Ezhilarasi PN, Karthik P, Chhanwal N, Anandharamakrishnan C (2012) Nanoencapsulation tech-
niques for food bioactive components: a review. Food Bioprocess Technol 6:628–647
FAO (2013) Food Agriculture Organization of the United Nations WHO, World Health
Organization. State of the Art on the Initiatives and Activities Relevant to Risk Assessment and
Risk Management of Nanotechnologies in the Food and Agriculture Sectors. Technical Paper,
FAO and WHO, Rome
Feynman RP (1996) No ordinary genius: the illustrated Richard Feynman. W.W. Norton &
Company, New York
Floros JD, Newsome R, Fisher W, Barbosa-Cánovas GV, Chen H, Dunne CP et al (2010) Feeding
the world today and tomorrow: the importance of food science and technology. Compr Rev
Food Sci Food Saf 9:572–599
Fraceto LF, Grillo R, de Medeiros GA, Scognamiglio V, Rea G, Bartolucci C (2016) Nanotechnology
in agriculture: which innovation potential does it have? Front Environ Sci 4:20
Garnett T, Godfray C (2012) Sustainable intensification in agriculture. Navigating a course through
competing food system priorities. In: Food climate research network and the oxford martin pro-
gramme on the future of food. University of Oxford, Oxford
Gibney E (2015) Bucky balls in space solve 100-year-old riddle. Nature News. https://doi.
org/10.1038/nature.2015.17987
Grillo R, Dos Santos NZP, Maruyama CR, Rosa AH, De Lima R, Fraceto LF et al (2012) Poly
(epsilon-caprolactone) nanocapsules as carrier systems for herbicides: physico-chemical char-
acterization and genotoxicity evaluation. J Hazard Mater 231:1–9
Grillo R, Abhilash PC, Fraceto LF (2016) Nanotechnology applied to bio-encapsulation of pesti-
cides. J Nanosci Nanotechnol 16:1231–1234
Ion AC, Ion I, Culetu A (2010) Carbon-based nanomaterials: environmental applications, vol 38.
Univ. Politehn. Bucharest, București, pp 129–132
Kah M, Machinski P, Koerner P, Tiede K, Grillo R, Fraceto LF et al (2014) Analysing the fate
of nanopesticides in soil and the applicability of regulatory protocols using a polymer-based
nanoformulation of atrazine. Environ Sci Pollut Res Int 21:11699–11707
Kandasamy S, Prema RS (2015) Methods of synthesis of nano particles and its applications. J
Chem Pharm Res 7:278–285
Khin MM, Nair AS, Babu VJ, Murugan R, Ramakrishna S (2012) A review on nanomaterials for
environmental remediation. Energy Environ Sci 5:8075–8109
Khota LR, Sankarana S, Majaa JM, Ehsania R, Schuster EW (2012) Applications of nanomaterials
in agricultural production and crop protection: a review. Crop Prot 35:64–70
Lambreva MD, Lavecchia T, Tyystjärvi E, Antal TK, Orlanducci S, Margonelli A et al (2015)
Potential of carbon nanotubes in algal biotechnology. Photosyn Res 125:451–471
Malysheva A, Lombi E, Voelcker NH (2015) Bridging the divide between human and environmen-
tal nanotoxicology. Nat Nanotechnol 10:835–844
Mishra S, Singh HB (2015) Biosynthesized silver nanoparticles as a nanoweapon against phy-
topathogens: exploring their scope and potential in agriculture. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol
99:1097–1107
ment. In: Kole C, Kumar D, Khodakovskaya M (eds) Plant nanotechnology. Springer, Cham,
pp 219–256
Biol Sci 1:414–419
Sci Appl 7:63–71
Nuruzzaman M, Rahman MM, Liu Y, Naidu R (2016) Nanoencapsulation, nano-guard for pesti-
cides: a new window for safe application. J Agric Food Chem 64:1447–1483
Oliveira HC, Stolf-Moreira R, Martinez CBR, Grillo R, De Jesus MB, Fraceto LF (2015a)
Nanoencapsulation enhances the post-emergence herbicidal activity of atrazine against mus-
tard plants. PLoS One 10:e0132971
Oliveira HC, Stolf-Moreira R, Martinez CBR, Sousa GFM, Grillo R, De Jesus MB et al (2015b)
Evaluation of the side effects of poly(epsilon-caprolactone) nanocapsules containing atrazine
toward maize plants. Front Chem 3:61
Ozdemir M, Kemerli T (2016) Innovative applications of micro and nanoencapsulation in food
packaging. In: Lakkis JM (ed) Encapsulation and controlled release technologies in food sys-
tems. Wiley, Chichester
Parisi C, Vigani M, Rodriguez-Cerezo E (2015) Agricultural nanotechnologies: what are the cur-
rent possibilities? Nano Today 10:124–127
Life Sciences
Prasad R, Pandey R, Barman I (2016) Engineering tailored nanoparticles with microbes: quo vadis.
Wiley Interdiscip Rev Nanomed Nanobiotechnol 8:316–330
fmicb.2017.01014
Ravichandran R (2010) Nanotechnology applications in food and food processing: innovative
green approaches, opportunities and uncertainties for global market. Int J Green Nanotechnol
Phys Chem 1(2):P72–P96
Rodríguez J, Martín MJ, Ruiz AM, Clares B (2016) Current encapsulation strategies for bioactive
oils: from alimentary to pharmaceutical perspectives. Food Res Int 83:41–59
Sabir S, Arshad M, Chaudhari SK (2014) Zinc oxide nanoparticles for revolutionizing agriculture:
synthesis and applications. Sci World J 2014:8
Sadik OA, Du N, Kariuki V, Okello V, Bushlyar V (2014) Current and emerging technologies for
the characterization of nanomaterials. ACS Sustain Chem Eng 2:1707–1716
Sagadevan S, Periasamy M (2014) Recent trends in nano-biosensors and their applications - a
review. Rev Adv Mater Sci 36:62–69
Scognamiglio V (2013) Nanotechnology in glucose monitoring: advances and challenges in the
last 10 years. Biosens Bioelectron 47:12–25
Scognamiglio V, Arduini F, Palleschi G, Rea G (2014) Biosensing technology for sustainable food
safety. Trac-Trends Anal Chem 62:1–10
Sekhon BS (2014) Nanotechnology in Agri-food production: an overview. Nanotechnol Sci
Appl 7:31–53
Sertova NM (2015) Application of nanotechnology in detection of mycotoxins and in agricultural
sector. J Cent Eur Agric 16:117–130
Servin AD, White JC (2016) Nanotechnology in agriculture: next steps for understanding engi-
neered nanoparticle exposure and risk. Nano Impact 1:9–12
Singh S, Vishwakarma K, Singh S, Sharma S, Dubey NK, Singh VK et al (2017) Understanding
the plant and nanoparticle interface at transcriptomic and proteomic level: a concentric over-
view. Plant Gene 11(Part B):265–272. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.plgene.2017.03.006
The Royal Society (2009) Reaping the benefits: science and the sustainable intensification of
global agriculture. The Royal Society, London
Thornhill S, Vargyas E, Fitzgerald T, Chisholm N (2016) Household food security and biofuel
feedstock production in rural Mozambique and Tanzania. Food Secur 8:953–971
Tripathi DK, Shweta, Singh S, Singh S, Pandey R, Singh VP et al (2016) An overview on manu-
factured nanoparticles in plants: uptake, translocation, accumulation and phytotoxicity. Plant
Physiol Biochem 110:2–12
Valdes MG, Gonzalez ACV, Calzon JAG, Diaz-Garcia ME (2009) Analytical nanotechnology for
food analysis. Microchim Acta 166:1–19
Vanderroost M, Ragaert P, Devlieghere F, De Meulenaer B (2014) Intelligent food packaging: the
next generation. Trends Food Sci Technol 39:47–62
Vartholomeos P, Fruchard M, Ferreira A, Mavroidis C (2011) MRI-guided nanorobotic systems for
therapeutic and diagnostic applications. Annu Rev Biomed Eng 13:157–184
Vidotti M, Carvalhal RF, Mendes RK, Ferreira DCM, Kubota LT (2011) Biosensors based on gold
nanostructures. J Braz Chem Soc 22:3–20
Viswanathan S, Radecki J (2008) Nanomaterials in electrochemical biosensors for food analysis- a
review. Pol J Food Nutr Sci 58:157–164
Yao J, Yang M, Duan YX (2014) Chemistry, biology, and medicine of fluorescent nanomateri-
als and related systems: new insights into biosensing, bioimaging, genomics, diagnostics, and
therapy. Chem Rev 114:6130–6178
Yunlong C, Smit B (1994) Sustainability in agriculture: a general review. Agric Ecosyst Environ
49:299–307
Nano-Biosensors: NextGen Diagnostic
Tools in Agriculture
Fayaz Ahmad Dar, Gazala Qazi, and Tanveer Bilal Pirzadah
1 Introduction
Development of biosensors through nanotechnology has played an important role in

enhancing the sensitivity and performance of biosensors, which has resulted in the
formulation of nano-biosensors. These nano-biosensors are more refined and reli-
able as they are compact devices and offers rapid screening to the number of ana-
lytes at low cost. Nano-biosensors have a great potential in our day-to-day life as
well as in agriculture. Nano-biosensors are a rapidly emerging technology that can
be used effectively to improve our agricultural productivity in the form of nano-
fertilizers, nano-herbicides, nano-pesticides, nano-insecticides, pathogenic control
agents, moisture, and soil pH (Rai et al. 2012; Pirzadah et al. 2019). Besides, nano-
biosensors have major implication in the area of agriculture like physical monitor-
ing of temperature, humidity, soil quality and fertility, sensing microbiological
microenvironment of the soil, indicator for seed viability and shelf life, response
sensors for irrigation and safety in agronomy, precision agriculture, detection of
residual pesticides, fertilizers and toxins, and plant pathological monitoring (Rai
et al. 2012; Kaushal and Wani 2017). The physical and chemical properties of nano-
materials can be employed in the development of nano-biosensors. Moreover, the
sensitivity and performance of nano-biosensors can be improved using nanomateri-
als through new signal transduction technologies (Sagadevan and Periasamy 2014).
F. A. Dar (*)
Department of Bioresources, University of Kashmir, Srinagar, Jammu and Kashmir, India
T. B. Pirzadah
G. Qazi
Department of Botany, Islamia College of Science and Commerce,

130 F. A. Dar et al.
At present, nano-biosensors are in its infancy stage; however, development of

rapid, sensitive, and cost-effective nano-biosensors is due to the technological
advancements from the past few decades which have resulted in the production of
nano-biosensor systems of vital importance in the fields such as health care, envi-
ronment, agriculture, genome analysis, food and process industries, defense and
security (Fogel and Limson 2016). For the development of nano-biosensors, various
types of nanoparticles such as metallic (titanium, platinum, gold, silver, aluminum,
iron, zinc, etc.), carbon nanotubes (CNT’s), magnetic nanoparticles (MNP’s), nano-
rods (NR’s), and quantum dots (QD’s) have been actively investigated (Prasad et al.
2017). In general, a biosensor is an amalgamation of two components, the biological
one (receptors, antibodies, enzymes, nucleic acids, proteins, organelles, cell, tissue,
and microorganisms) and the electronic component and their interaction yields a
measurable signal intercepted by the transducer and finally detected by the detector.
Thus, a biosensor is an analytical device that converts biological response into an
electrical signal (Rai et al. 2012). Conversely, a nano-biosensor is an upgraded ver-
sion of biosensor, which is compact, highly sensitive, and miniature structure com-
pared to conventional biosensors. These nano-biosensors are known for their
specificity, stability, specific interaction between analytes, independent of stirring,
pH, and temperature. Besides reaction time with the analyte is quick with accurate,
precise, reproducible, linear range and without any noise. These are tiny, biocom-
patible, non-toxic, non-antigenic, inexpensive, convenient, and easily operated.
Nano-biosensor or nanomaterial based biosensor can play major role in agriculture
and allied fields because of their improved detection sensitivity and high specificity.
Nano-biosensors can also act as diagnostic tools to assess soil quality and various
plant diseases and therefore can be used to treat diseases caused by bacteria, fungi,
and viruses (Singh et al. 2011a, b, c; Singh and Choi 2010). Furthermore, nano-
diagnostics is an integration of nanotechnology and molecular diagnostics that
offers a promising tool for disease diagnosis in plants (Jain 2003).
2 Nano-biosensor Development-Brief Overview
Nanotechnology deals with the alteration or generation of materials that are

extremely small in size (10−9 m). There has been a significant modification in the
development of biosensors since the year 1962, and till now four generations of
biosensors have been produced. The first generation of biosensors was based on
electrical response only, the second generation of biosensors involved specific
mediators between the reaction and transducer to create an improved measurable
response, the third generation of biosensors involves that the reaction itself causes
the response and no mediator diffusion is directly involved, and the fourth genera-
tion of biosensors involves the incorporation of micro, nano, and bionano electro-
mechanical systems, nanotechnology, and biotechnology have introduced a lot of
features (Rai et al. 2012; Dede and Altay 2018). The rapid evolution of nano-
biosensors is basically dependent upon their progress in their analytical perfor-
mance and bio-detection applications. Nano-biosensors involve the inclusion of
Nano-Biosensors: NextGen Diagnostic Tools in Agriculture 131
nanotechnology in biosensor development that results in the development of more

effective, reliable, fast, and economical biosensors. From the past few decades,
there has been a rapid progress in the development of nano-biosensors especially in
the agricultural and allied sectors, which has resulted in the production of fourth
generation of nano-biosensors that are capable of detecting multiple signals and are
highly sensitive, precise, and accurate (Dede and Altay 2018). A typical biosensor
consists of three essential components, the biological element, the transducer, and a
signal processing element (Sagadevan and Periasamy 2014). On the other hand, a
nano-biosensor is a compact analytical device consisting of biologically sensitized
element, a physicochemical transducer, and a signal processing device and all these
components are constructed at a nano-scale level.
3 Categories of Nano-biosensors in Agriculture
There are various types of nano-biosensors that are used in agriculture, such as
electrochemical nanosensors, optical nanosensors, nano-barcode technology,
e-Nose and e-Tongue, wireless nanosensors, and wireless sensor network (Fig. 1).
Some of the examples of various types of nano-biosensors and their mode of detec-
tion are given in Table 1.
Fig. 1 Various types of nano-biosensors used in agricultural sector

Table 1 Application of various nanosensors/nano-biosensors and their mode of detection

Target element/pathogen/application Mode of detection Reference
Organophosphates Amperometric Yan et al. (2013)
nanosensor
Sulfonamides Amperometric Xu et al. (2013)
nanosensor
Ractopamine and salbutamol Amperometric Lin et al. (2013)
nanosensor
Fructose Amperometric Antiochia et al. (2013)
nanosensor
Hydrogen peroxide Amperometric Nasirizadeh et al. (2015)
nanosensor
Carbosulfan Voltammetric Nesakumar et al. (2016)
nanosensor
Heavy metal contamination Voltammetric Yavuz et al. (2016)
nanosensor
Salmonella typhi Voltammetric Singh et al. (2015)
nanosensor
Nitrite Optical nanosensor Chen et al. (2016)
Reactive oxygen species (ROS) Optical nanosensor Hu et al. (2014)
S. aureus, V. parahemolyticus, and Optical nanosensor Wu et al. (2014)
S. typhimurium, E. coli
Concanavalin A, antibiotics, Optical nanosensor Evtugyn et al. (2013); Huang
mycotoxins, and pathogen like et al. (2013); Zeng et al. (2014)
E. coli
Malathion and sulfonamides Optical nanosensor Dasary et al. (2008), Guillén et al.
(2011)
Salmonella enterica Serovar Nanobarcode Zhang et al. 2009
Enteritidis technology
Aroma transfer from food plastics e-Nose and Torri and Piochi (2016)
bags e-Tongue
Quality assessment of beef fillets e-Nose and Mohareb et al. (2016)
e-Tongue
Alicyclobacillus acidoterrestris e-Nose and Huang et al. 2015
e-Tongue
Edible oil e-Nose and Men et al. (2014)
e-Tongue
Adulterated milk e-Nose and Yu et al. (2007)
e-Tongue
Leaf wetness and leaf area index Wireless El Maazouzi et al. (2014);
nanosensors and Shimojo et al. (2013)
WSN
Green house management Wireless ArunKumar and Alagumeenaakshi
nanosensors and (2014)
WSN
Mango and black pepper farming Wireless Kodali and Rawat (2013); Li and
nanosensors and Shen (2013)
WSN
(continued)
Table 1 (continued)
Target element/pathogen/application Mode of detection Reference
Real-time traceability and food chain Wireless Ko et al. (2014), Wang et al.
management system nanosensors and (2015)
WSN
Marine fish farming and Wireless Lloret et al. (2015)
sustainability monitoring nanosensors and
WSN
3.1 Electrochemical Nanosensors
Electrochemical nanosensors are the most widely used sensors that are based on
chemical reactions between nanofabricated biomolecule and the biological element
and target analyte to produce or consume ions or electrons, which are measured as
electrochemical signals (Asha Chaubey 2002). Quantitatively, the electrochemical
signal generated is correlated with the amount of analyte present in a sample. These
nanosensors are highly sensitive, compatible, robust, economical, rapid, low main-
tenance, energy efficient make them applicable for sensing in a wide range of appli-
cations. Based on their working principle, electrochemical nanosensors device
could be categorized in amperometry (based on redox reaction), voltammetry (based
on varying electric current), and potentiometry (based on variable potential differ-
ence of electrodes). Nanomaterials like electrochemically active carbon nanotubes,
nanofibers, and fullerenes have been recently developed and applied for highly sen-
sitive biochemical sensors. These nanosensors have also relevant implications for
application in agriculture, in particular for soil analysis, easy biochemical sensing
and control, water management and delivery, pesticide, and nutrient delivery.
Nanomaterial is considered as one of the possible solutions to problems in food and
agriculture, just like biotechnological issues of safety on health, biodiversity, and
environment along with appropriate rules and regulation (Kuzma and verHage 2006).
3.2 Optical Nanosensors
Optical nanosensors depend on the detection of the change in the optical signal and
consequently make it suitable for various spectroscopic measurements, such as
absorption, fluorescence, phosphorescence, Raman effect, Raman scattering, and
refraction by sensing changes in wavelength, phase, time, intensity, and polarity of
the light. In general, the functioning of optical biosensors is based on fluorescence
spectroscopy, surface plasmon resonance, interferometry, and spectroscopy
(Srivastava et al. 2017). Recently, fluorescent nanoparticles (NPs) or quantum dots
(QDs) have been developed for labeling the plant proteins (Pyrzynska 2011; Chahine
et al. 2014). It has been observed that QDs at low concentration have no detectable
cytotoxicity for seed germination and seedling growth. Therefore, based on such
observation, QDs can be utilized for live imaging in plant root systems to verify
known physiological processes (Hu et al. 2010; Das et al. 2015).
3.3 Nano-barcode Technology
Nano-barcoding and nano-processing are novel technologies that can change the
way of keeping check on agricultural trade (Li et al. 2005). Although, barcoding is
well known phenomenon and has been extensively used as a tool for the identifica-
tion of plant, animal, and microbial species using a small stretch of gene sequence
(Ferri et al. 2009). With the help of metallic and magnetic nanoparticles, significant
development has been made in utilizing nanotechnology. For instance, the dual gold
and iron oxide nanoparticle have been separately conjugated with two different
DNA sequences for rapid and reliable detection of Salmonella enteric, Serovar
enteritidis in the food sample (Zhang et al. 2009). Furthermore, grocery barcoding
has been put into practice for the efficient analysis and identification of crop dis-
eases. Nano-barcodes were created in such a manner, so that they can tag variable
pathogens observed in the agricultural field and can be checked by utilizing tools
reliant on fluorescence (Kaushal and Wani 2017). Nano-barcoding can be employed
in labeling food products as well as in combination with nanoparticle based intelli-
gent inks that may offer smart recognition of relevant food item. Printed labels on
food items can provide reliable information about temperature, time, pathogens,
freshness, humidity, etc. (Prasad et al. 2017).
3.4 e-Nose and e-Tongue
e-Nose and e-Tongue are nanomaterial based devices that are functionally similar to
human sensory organs and are used to detect array of gases, odors, taste, and their
variable concentration (Fig. 2). They have acquired critical importance to determine
the quality and quantity of material such as food, beverages, agriculture, pharmacol-
ogy, personal care product manufacturing and processing (Baldwin et al. 2011). For
instance, e-Nose can be used to assess the release of volatile aldehydes by seeds
during storage condition thereby preventing their degradation through timely inter-
vention. Besides, there are nano-scale based smart delivery systems that can be used
to prevent nutrient deficiencies and diagnose diseases in plants to provide complete
protection (Shang et al. 2019). The main aim of these nano-scale based devices is to
control, target, and regulate the plant systems to escape biological intervention
(Kessler 2011). The nanosensor based e-Nose and e-Tongue are highly sensitive,
selective, redundant, accurate, reliable devices that has wider application in agricul-
ture, forestry, and food industry (Srivastava et al. 2017).
Fig. 2 Schematic representation of electronic nose with its component; sample head space, nano-
sensor array, unit for algorithmic processing, and classified data after the detection in form of a
map
3.5 Wireless Nanosensors/Wireless Sensor Network
A wireless sensor network (WSN) is self-organizing with intelligent decision-

making capability, self-dynamic, self-diagnostics, fault tolerance, and self-healing
autonomous operating mode with information security system made up of several
components of radio-frequency transceivers, sensors or nanosensors node, micro-
controllers, and power sources (Srivastava et al. 2017). The wireless sensors gave
a reliable measurement of small change in pressure, temperature, humidity along
with the temporal observation. These features of wireless sensors make them suit-
able for their application in environment, defense, agriculture, and food industries
(Srivastava et al. 2017). Wireless nanosensors can generate integrated information
in precision farming and this information can be used to control precisely the
application of fertilizers and irrigation in the field (Sahota et al. 2011). For instance,
WiPAM is a wireless sensor network based irrigation management system that was
used to check soil moisture and temperature related information. The design and
deployment of the wireless sensors network are continuously expanding with mul-
tiple monitoring and control. In addition to irrigation management system, the
wireless sensor technology is being deployed for many application, such as sens-
ing leaf wetness and leaf area index in the agriculture field (El Maazouzi et al.
2014; Shimojo et al. 2013), precise greenhouse management (ArunKumar and
Alagumeenaakshi 2014), in mango and black pepper farming (Kodali and Rawat
2013; Li and Shen 2013).
4 Role of Nano-biosensors in Precision Agriculture
The aim of precision agriculture/precision farming is to increase the crop yield with
limited input of agrochemicals by employing high-tech information technological
resources to monitor and control the environmental variables (Kaushal and Wani
2017). Remote sensing (RS), geographical information system (GIS), and geosyn-
chronous positioning system (GPS) can play an important role in yield analysis,
pest monitoring, natural catastrophes, and forecasting, thereby helping in a ddressing
the problems due to pathogens and pests, fertilizer requirements, and other variables
with accuracy and precision (Sekhon 2014). Variable rate technology (VRT) and
yield monitors are the two main parts of precision agriculture which works in coor-
dination of GIS and GPS along with the VRT field instruments. VRT is a device that
manipulates and utilizes all the information based on variables like soil status, fertil-
izer, chemical and water requirement in order to increase yields and reduce input
expenses, thus dropping waste and labor expenditure. Nanotech based sensors in
combination with RS and GIS can provide efficient monitoring and information
services in relation to crop growth and soil conditions (Kaushal and Wani 2017).
Precision farming takes advantage of nanosensors and nano-based smart delivery
systems to efficiently utilize the agricultural resources and precisely detect the crop
pathogens in order to enhance the crop productivity in an economic way (Rai et al.
2012; Jones 2014; Prasad et al. 2014; Kaushal and Wani 2017). Therefore nano-
biosensors can be major tool to distribute nutrients and fertilizers as per the require-
ment of the crop and to successfully achieve the goal of precision farming (Kaushal
and Wani 2017).
5 ano-biosensors as a Tool for Soil Health, Smart Delivery

N
Systems and Disease Management
Nano-biosensors are very effective in promoting soil and environment health by

making use of next generation technology thus enabling better control on environ-
mental variables. Moreover, nano-biosensors have been found very useful in
detecting pollutants and pathogens due to their molecular precision and sensitivity.
Nanomaterial based biosensors have the ability to precisely monitor the temporal
and seasonal changes occurring in the rhizosphere of the plant system (Choudhary
et al. 2015: Rai et al. 2012; Sekhon 2014). It has been reported that 70% of con-
ventional fertilizers and plant protection products (ppp’s) do not reach their spe-
cific targets because they are unstable in the environment and difficult to be taken
up (Solanki et al. 2015). Nano-based smart delivery systems have the ability to
provide more efficient and targeted delivery to specific plant cells due to their size-
related properties (Solanki et al. 2015; Chhipa and Joshi 2016; Gogos et al. 2012;
Nair et al. 2010). Due to their greater stability in the environment, they are
capable of improving nutrient availability and PPP’s to crops (Rai and Ingle 2012;
Solanki et al. 2015; Liu and Lal 2015). Another important feature of smart delivery
systems is to enhance the delivery of nutrients and ppp’s as they enable their con-
trolled release and extend their effectiveness from three to over 30 days (Adak
et al. 2012; Solanki et al. 2015). Smart delivery of nutrients and ppp’s improves
the resistance of crops towards droughts, pests, and pollution and in the same way
the effect of pesticides was found to be doubled (Song et al. 2012; Xiang et al.
2013; Kah and Hofmann 2014). Thus, there was a significant improvement in the
quality and quantity of yields (Mukhopadhyay 2014; Solanki et al. 2015; Chhipa
and Joshi 2016). Nano-biosensor based smart delivery systems can further enhance
the process of releasing nutrients and ppp’s in response to environmental stresses
and biological needs and thus provides an opportunities for real time monitoring
and control (Solanki et al. 2015; Liu and Lal 2015; Ramesiah 2015). Nano-
biosensors and nano-based smart delivery systems could help in the efficient use
of agricultural natural resources like water, nutrients, and chemicals through preci-
sion farming. Through the use of nanomaterials and global positioning systems
with satellite imaging of fields, farm managers could remotely detect crop pests or
evidence of stress such as drought. Once pest or drought is detected, there would
be automatic adjustment of pesticide applications or irrigation levels. Nano-
encapsulated slow release fertilizers have also become a trend to save fertilizer
consumption and to minimize environmental pollution.
6 Nano-biosensors and Sustainable Agriculture
The concept of sustainable agriculture can be achieved by incorporating nanotech-

nology based biosensors due to their ability to provide new dimensions to utilize
tools and techniques which can maximize agricultural productivity by addressing
issues related to agro-technology, irrigation and fertilizer requirements, food pro-
duction and processing, packaging and storage. Thus, nanotechnology based bio-
sensors can offer wider applications in food and agriculture sector. For sustainable
agriculture, optimum utilization of water resources is essential factor and to combat
this problem, nano-biosensors like nano-hydrogel, which has the ability to absorb
and release water molecules in a controlled manner thereby allowing efficient utili-
zation of water resources is of paramount importance (Vundavalli et al. 2015;
Pirzadah et al. 2019). Nano-hydrogels such as silver coated hydrogels and biode-
gradable hydrogels are utilized for this process and are very useful nano-biosensors
especially in the areas which are under drought, one of the major environmental
concerns in the near future (Magalhaes et al. 2013; Montesano et al. 2015).
Moreover, recent studies on nano-encapsulated seeds have shown their ability to
germinate faster and are more resilient to environmental stresses than non-encapsu-
lated seeds (Adhikari et al. 2016). Nano-encapsulation increases seedling strength,
growth, and longevity (Khodakovskaya et al. 2009; Dehkourdi and Mosavi 2013; Adak
et al. 2016). Certain pollutants, pests, and diseases are also responsible for causing
severe losses to crop plants. Biosensors based on organic detection mechanism have
been developed having ability to detect these specific threats (Perumal and Hashim
2014; Otles and Yalcın 2015). Therefore, nano-biosensors provide a very precise
tool that can be used to prevent pest out-breaks and monitor soil quality, which ulti-
mately leads to improved yields. With the help of nanotechnological intervention,
the sustainable agriculture intensification concept can be achieved. The application
of nanotechnology approach to agricultural practices can play an important role in
plant protection strategies, prevents nutrient losses, promotes rapid pest detection,
and enhances yields through improved pest management (Ghormade et al. 2011;
Shang et al. 2019). The applications of nanotechnology to agriculture can be broadly
categorized as:
1. Nanoclays and nanozeolites have the ability to enhance water holding capacity
of soil (Sekhon 2014).
2. Nanosensor based devices for the analysis of soil, water, nutrient, and pesticide
management.
3. Nano-magnets for the expulsion of soil contaminants.
4. Nanoparticles (NPs) for the production of improved insecticides, pesticides, and
insect repellents.
5. Nanomaterial based devices for the discharge of genetic material for crop
enhancement (Kaushal and Wani 2017).
A variety of nano-biosensors have been developed by using inorganic, poly-
meric, and lipid NPs through different techniques which include emulsification,
ionic gelation, polymerization to increase the plant protection and productivity
(Fraceto et al. 2016). Such techniques can be used for the development of intelligent
nano-systems which has the ability to minimize leaching and at the same time
improving the uptake of nutrients by plants. Besides, such systems can mitigate
eutrophication by reducing the transfer of nitrogen to groundwater (Liu and Lal
2015). Moreover, nanomaterials could also be exploited to improve the structure
and function of pesticides by increasing solubility, enhancing resistance against
hydrolysis and photodecomposition, and/or by providing a more specific and con-
trolled release toward target organisms (Mishra and Singh 2015; Grillo et al. 2016;
Nuruzzaman et al. 2016).
7 Nano-biosensors as a Tool for Crop Protection
Nanomaterial based products in agriculture are of greater importance for enhancing

crop productivity and efficiency. The incorporation of advanced technologies for the
development of nano-biosensors, quantum dots (QDs), nanostructured platforms,
nano-imaging, and nano-pore DNA sequencing has increased the sensitivity and
specificity of pathogen detection, facilitates high throughput analysis, and can be
used for high quality monitoring and crop protection (Khiyami et al. 2014).
Furthermore, the availability of diagnostic kits has enabled fast and easy detection
of harmful pathogens, made it possible through timely intervention the prevention
of epidemic diseases (Savaliya et al. 2015; Khiyami et al. 2014). The application of
nano-biosensors and nanomaterial based devices has made it possible to detect
pathogens in a quicker, cost-effective and precisely for the treatment of diseases.
Such accuracy in technology has enabled to devise effective integrated disease pest
management systems in order to modify crop environments to stop the intrusion of
plant pathogens (Kashyap et al. 2016). However, there is a need to assess the health
hazards and toxicity caused by the use of nanomaterial based products in agricul-
ture, environment, and human health. Nanomaterials such as fullerenes (C60), CNTs,
silver, iron, titanium dioxide, aluminum oxide, cerium oxide, zinc oxide, silicon
dioxide, dendrimers, nanoclays, and gold nanoparticles are under investigation
(Duhan et al. 2017). Although, nanomaterials have the ability to resolve the prob-
lems associated with agriculture like overdependence on irrigation, climatic insta-
bility, poor energy conversion to products like nanopesticides and nano-fertilizers,
disease prevention in crops, use of agricultural wastes and nanosensors.
Nanomaterial based nano-biosensors have the ability to resolve the problems in

agriculture like overdependence on irrigation, climate resilience, disease preven-
tion, use of agricultural waste products, and high energy conversion to products like
nano-fertilizers and nano-pesticides. Nanomaterial based nano-devices have a great
potential in reshaping the agricultural setup. These devices are used in the form of
variety of agricultural products, viz., nano-biosensors, nano-herbicides, nano-
fertilizers, nano-pesticides, and so on. They have the ability to reduce the consump-
tion of conventional agrochemicals employing smart delivery systems thereby
minimizing the loss of nutrients, improves the overall crop yield through optimum
resource management. However, the utilization of nanomaterial based products
needs to be taken care off as they might show some adverse effects which needs to
be properly assessed before their release to the agriculture and environment.
Besides, nano-biosensors offer wider application in plant protection, seed germi
nation, plant growth and development, pathogen/disease detection, pesticide/
herbicide detection making them highly efficient and productive for the agriculture
sector. Nano-biosensors are one of the great scientific, engineering, and technologi-
cal innovations of the twenty-first century. Therefore, it is equally important to
make improvements in these next generation biosensors so far as their sensitivity
and specificity are concerned to become an important tool in plant diagnostics, dis-
ease detection, and crop improvement. In addition, there is a need for rapid, trust-
worthy, low cost, multiplexed screening to detect a wide range of plant based
bio-products.
References
Adak T, Kumar J, Dey D, Shakil NA, Walia S (2012) Residue and bio-efficacy evaluation of con-
trolled release formulations of imidacloprid against pests in soybean (Glycine max). J Environ
Sci Health Part B 47(3):226–231
Adak T, Kumar J, Shakil NA, Pandey S (2016) Role of nano-range amphiphilic polymers in seed
quality enhancement of soybean and imidacloprid retention capacity on seed coatings: soybean
seed quality enhancement by amphiphilic nano-polymers. J Sci Food Agric 96(13):4351–4357
Adhikari T, Kundu S, Rao AS (2016) Zinc delivery to plants through seed coating with nano-zinc
oxide particles. J Plant Nutr 39(1):136–146
Antiochia R, Vinci G, Gorton L (2013) Rapid and direct determination of fructose in food: a new
osmium-polymer mediated biosensor. Food Chem 140(4):742–747. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
foodchem.2012.11.023
ArunKumar M, Alagumeenaakshi M (2014) RPL optimization for precise greenhouse manage-
ment using wireless sensor network. In: 2014 International Conference on Green Computing
Communication and Electrical Engineering (ICGCCEE). IEEE, Piscataway
Asha Chaubey BDM (2002) Mediated biosensors. Biosens Bioelectron 17:441–456
Baldwin EA, Bai JH, Plotto A, Dea S (2011) Electronic noses and tongues: applications for the food
and pharmaceutical industries. Sensors 11(5):4744–4766. https://doi.org/10.3390/s110504744
Chahine NO, Collette NM, Thomas BC, Genetos DC, Loots GG (2014) Nanocomposite scaffold for
chondrocyte growth and cartilage tissue engineering: effects of carbon nanotube surface func-
tionalization. Tissue Eng Part A 20:2305–2315. https://doi.org/10.1089/ten.TEA.2013.0328
Chen C, Yuan ZQ, Chang HT, Lu FN, Li ZH, Lu C (2016) Silver nanoclusters as fluorescent nano-
sensors for selective and sensitive nitrite detection. Anal Methods 8(12):2628–2633. https://
doi.org/10.1039/c6ay00214e
Chhipa H, Joshi P (2016) Nanofertilisers, nanopesticides and nanosensors in agriculture. In: Ranjan
S, Dasgupta N, Lichtfouse E (eds) Nanoscience in food and agriculture. Springer International
Publishing, Cham, pp 247–282
Choudhary MK, Singh M, Saharan V (2015) Applications of nanobiosensors in agriculture.
Popular Kheti, Jodhpur. V (3), Issue-1 (January–March)
Das S, Wolfson BP, Tetard L, Tharkur J, Bazata J, Santra S (2015) Effect of N-acetyl cysteine
coated CdS:Mn/ZnS quantum dots on seed germination and seedling growth of snow pea
(Pisum sativum L.): imaging and spectroscopic studies. Environ Sci 2:203–212. https://doi.
org/10.1039/c4en00198b
Dasary SSR, Rai US, Yu HT, Anjaneyulu Y, Dubey M, Ray PC (2008) Gold nanoparticle based
surface enhanced fluorescence for detection of organophosphorus agents. Chem Phys Lett
460(1–3):187–190. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cplett.2008.05.082
Dede S, Altay F (2018) Biosensors from the first generation to nano-biosensors. Int Adv Res Eng
J 02(02):200–207
Dehkourdi EH, Mosavi M (2013) Effect of anatase nanoparticles (TiO2) on parsley seed germina-
tion (Petroselinum crispum) In Vitro. Biol Trace Elem Res 155(2):283–286
Duhan JS, Kumar R, Kumar N, Kaur P, Nehra K, Duhan S (2017) Nanotechnology: the new per-
spective in precision agriculture. Biotechnol Rep 15:11–23
El Maazouzi L, Castro S, Gil N, Alvarez J, Pesado J, Lamas JA, Campos I (2014) Contribution to
precision agriculture using sap flow sensors and leaf wetness in wireless sensor network. Vii
Congreso Iberico De Agroingenieria Y Ciencias Horticolas: Innovar Y Producir Para El Futuro.
Innovating and Producing for the Future, pp 877–882
Evtugyn G, Porfireva A, Stepanova V, Kutyreva M, Gataulina A, Ulakhovich N, Hianik T (2013)
Impedimetric aptasensor for ochratoxin a determination based on au nanoparticles stabilized
with hyper-branched polymer. Sens (Basel) 13(12):16129–16145
Ferri G, Alu M, Corradini B, Licata M, Beduschi G (2009) Species identification through DNA
“barcodes”. Genet Test Mol Biomark 13(3):421–426. https://doi.org/10.1089/gtmb.2008.0144
Fogel R, Limson J (2016) Developing biosensors in developing countries: South Africa as a case
study. Biosensors 6:5. https://doi.org/10.3390/bios6010005
Fraceto LF, Grillo R, de Medeiros GA, Scognamiglio V, Rea G, Bartolucci C (2016) Nanotechnology
in agriculture: which innovation potential does it have? Front Environ Sci 4:20. https://doi.
org/10.3389/fenvs.2016.00020
protection and nutrition of plants. Biotechnol Adv 29:792–803
Gogos A, Knauer K, Bucheli TD (2012) Nanomaterials in plant protection and fertilization: cur-
rent state, foreseen applications, and research priorities. J Agric Food Chem 60(39):9781–9792
Grillo R, Abhilash PC, Fraceto LF (2016) Nanotechnology applied to bio-encapsulation of pesti-
cides. J Nanosci Nanotechnol 16:1231–1234. https://doi.org/10.1166/jnn.2016.12332
Guillen I, Gabaldon JA, Nunez-Delicado E, Puchades R, Maquieira A, Morais S (2011) Detection
of sulphathiazole in honey samples using a lateral flow immunoassay. Food Chem 129(2):624–
629. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodchem.2011.04.080
Hu Y, Li J, Ma L, Peng Q, Feng W, Zhang L, He S, Yang F, Huang J, Li L (2010) High efficiency
transport of quantum dots into plant roots with the aid of Silwet L-77. Plant Physiol Biochem
48(8):703–709. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.plaphy.2010.04.001
Hu LZ, Deng L, Alsaiari S, Zhang DY, Khashab NM (2014) “Light-on” sensing of antioxidants
using gold nanoclusters. Anal Chem 86(10):4989–4994. https://doi.org/10.1021/ac500528m
Huang CF, Yao GH, Liang RP, Qiu JD (2013) Graphene oxide and dextran capped gold nanoparti-
cles based surface plasmon resonance sensor for sensitive detection of concanavalin A. Biosens
Bioelectron 50:305–310. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bios.2013.07.002
Huang XC, Yuan YH, Wang XY, Jiang FH, Yue TL (2015) Application of electronic nose in tandem
with chemometric analysis for detection of Alicyclobacillus acidoterrestris-spawned spoilage
in apple juice beverage. Food Bioprocess Technol 8(6):1295–1304. https://doi.org/10.1007/
s11947-015-1491-2
Jain K (2003) Nanodiagnostics: application of nanotechnology (NT) in molecular diagnostics.
Expert Rev Mol Diagn 3(2):153–161
Jones PBC (2014) A nanotech revolution in agriculture and the food industry. Information Systems
for Biotechnology, Blacksburg. http://www.isb.vt.edu/articles/jun0605.htm
Kah M, Hofmann T (2014) Nanopesticide research: current trends and future priorities. Environ Int
63:224–235
Kashyap PL, Rai P, Sharma S, Chakdar H, Kumar S, Pandiyan K, Srivastava AK (2016)
Nanotechnology for the Detection and Diagnosis of Plant Pathogens. In: Ranjan S et al (eds)
Nanoscience in Food and Agriculture 2, Sustainable Agriculture Reviews 21. Springer, Cham.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-39306-3_8
Kaushal M, Wani SP (2017) Nanosensors: Frontiers in precision agriculture. In: Prasad R, Kumar
M, Kumar V (eds) Nanotechnology. Springer, Singapore, pp 279–291
Kessler R (2011) Engineered nanoparticles in consumer products: understanding a new ingredient.
Environ Health Perspect 119(3):120–125
Khiyami MA, Almoammar H, Awad YM, Alghuthaym MA, Abd-Elsalam KA (2014) Plant
pathogen nanodiagnostic techniques: forthcoming changes? Biotechnol Biotechnol Equip
28(5):775–785. https://doi.org/10.1080/13102818.2014.960739
Khodakovskaya M, Dervishi E, Mehmood M, Xu Y, Li Z, Watanabe F, Biris AS (2009) Carbon
nanotubes are able to penetrate plant seed coat and dramatically affect seed germination and
plant growth. ACS Nano 3(10):3221–3227
Ko D, Kwak Y, Song S (2014) Real time traceability and monitoring system for agricultural
products based on wireless sensor network. Int J Distrib Sens Netw 10:832510. https://doi.
org/10.1155/2014/832510
Kodali RK, Rawat N (2013) Wireless sensor network in mango farming. In: 2013 4th Nirma
University International Conference on Engineering. IEEE, Piscataway
Kuzma J, verHage P (2006) Nanotechnology in agriculture and food production: anticipated appli-
cations. In: The project on emerging nanotechnologies. Woodrow Wilson International Center
for Scholars, Washington, DC
Li J, Shen C (2013) Energy conservative wireless sensor networks for black pepper monitoring in
tropical area. In: 2013 IEEE global high tech congress on electronics. IEEE, Piscataway
Li Y, Cu YT, Luo D (2005) Multiplexed detection of pathogen DNA with DNA-based fluorescence
nanobarcodes. Nat Biotechnol 23(7):885–889
Lin KC, Hong CP, Chen SM (2013) Simultaneous determination for toxic ractopamine and salbu-
tamol in pork sample using hybrid carbon nanotubes. Sens Actuators B-Chem 177:428–436.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.snb.2012.11.052
Liu RQ, Lal R (2015) Potentials of engineered nanoparticles as fertilizers for increasing agronomic
productions. Sci Total Environ 514:131–139. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2015.01.104
Lloret J, Garcia M, Sendra S, Lloret G (2015) An underwater wireless group-based sensor network
for marine fish farms sustainability monitoring. Telecommun Syst 60(1):67–84. https://doi.
org/10.1007/s11235-014-9922-3
Magalhaes ASG, Neto MPA, Bezerra MN, Feitosa JPA (2013) Superabsorbent hydrogel composite
with minerals aimed at water sustainability. J Braz Chem Soc 24(2):304–313
Men H, Chen DL, Zhang XT, Liu JJ, Ning K (2014) Data fusion of electronic nose and electronic
tongue for detection of mixed edible-oil. J Sens 2014:7. https://doi.org/10.1155/2014/840685
Mishra S, Singh HB (2015) Biosynthesized silver nanoparticles as a nano-weapon against phy-
topathogens: exploring their scope and potential in agriculture. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol
99:1097–1107. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00253-014-6296-0
Mohareb F, Papadopoulou O, Panagou E, Nychas GJ, Bessant C (2016) Ensemble-based support
vector machine classifiers as an efficient tool for quality assessment of beef fillets from elec-
tronic nose data. Anal Methods 8(18):3711–3721. https://doi.org/10.1039/c6ay00147e
Montesano FF, Parente A, Santamaria P, Sannino A, Serio F (2015) Biodegradable superabsorbent
hydrogel increases water retention properties of growing media and plant growth. Agric Sci
Procedia 4:451–458
Sci Appl 7:63–71
delivery to plants. Plant Sci 179(3):154–163
Nasirizadeh N, Hajihosseini S, Shekari Z, Ghaani M (2015) A novel electrochemical biosensor
based on a modified gold electrode for hydrogen peroxide determination in different bever-
age samples. Food Anal Methods 8(6):1546–1555. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12161-014-0041-2
Nesakumar N, Sethuraman S, Krishnan UM, Rayappan JBB (2016) Electrochemical acetylcholin-
esterase biosensor based on ZnO nanocuboids modified platinum electrode for the detection
of carbosulfan in rice. Biosens Bioelectron 77:1070–1077. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bios.2015.
11.010
Nuruzzaman M, Rahman MM, Liu Y, Naidu R (2016) Nano encapsulation, nano-guard for pes-
ticides: a new window for safe application. J Agric Food Chem 64:1447–1483. https://doi.
org/10.1021/acs.jafc.5b05214
Otles S, Yalcın B (2015) Strategic role of nanobiosensor in food: benefits and bottlenecks. In: Rai
M, Ribeiro C, Mattoso L, Duran N (eds) Nanotechnologies in food and agriculture. Springer
International Publishing, Cham, pp 169–182
Perumal V, Hashim U (2014) Advances in biosensors: principle, architecture and applications. J
Appl Biomed 12(1):1–15
Pirzadah TB, Malik B, Maqbool T, Rehman RU (2019) Development of Nano-bioformulations
of nutrients for sustainable agriculture. In: Prasad R, Kumar V, Kumar M, Choudhary D (eds)
Life Sciences
fmicb.2017.01014
Pyrzynska K (2011) Carbon nanotubes as sorbents in the analysis of pesticides. Chemosphere

83:1407–1413. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2011.01.057
Rai M, Ingle A (2012) Role of nanotechnology in agriculture with special reference to manage-
ment of insect pests. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 94(2):287–293
Rai V, Acharya S, Dey N (2012) Implications of nanobiosensors in agriculture. J Biomater
Nanobiotchnol 3:315–324
Ramesiah GN (2015) Nano fertilizers and nano sensors– an attempt for developing smart agricul-
ture. Int J Eng Res Gen Sci 3(1):314–320
Sagadevan S, Periasamy M (2014) Recent trends in nanobiosensors and their applications-a
Sahota H, Kumar R, Kamal A (2011) A wireless sensor network for precision agriculture and
its performance. Wirel Commun Mob Comput 11(12):1628–1645. https://doi.org/10.1002/
wcm.1229
Savaliya R, Shah D, Singh R, Kumar A, Shanker R, Dhawan A, Singh S (2015) Nanotechnology in
disease diagnostic techniques. Curr Drug Metab 16(8):645–661. https://doi.org/10.2174/138920
0216666150625121546
Sekhon BS (2014) Nanotechnology in agri-food production: an overview. Nanotechnol Sci Appl
7:31–53. https://doi.org/10.2147/NSA.S39406
Shang Y, Hasan MK, Ahammed GJ, Li M, Yin H, Zhou J (2019) Applications of nanotechnol-
ogy in plant growth and crop protection: a review. Molecules 24:2558. https://doi.org/10.3390/
molecules24142558
Shimojo T, Tashiro Y, Morito T, Suzuki M, Lee D, Kondo I, Fukuda N, Morikawa H (2013) A leaf
area index visualization method using wireless sensor networks. In: 2013 Proceedings of SICE
Annual Conference. IEEE, Nagoya, pp 2082–2087
Singh RP, Choi JW (2010) Bio-nanomaterials for versatile biomolecules detection technology.
Adv Mater Lett 1:83–84
Singh RP, Ashutosh T, Pandey AC (2011a) Silver/polyaniline nanocomposite for the electrocata-
lytic hydrazine oxidation. J Inorg Organomet Polym Mater 21:788–792
Singh RP, Kang DY, Choi JW (2011b) Nanofabrication of bio-self assembled monolayer and its
electrochemical property for toxicant detection. J Nanosci Nanotechnol 11:408–412
Singh RP, Shukla VK, Yadav RS, Sharma PK, Singh PK, Pandey AC (2011c) Biological approach
of zinc oxide nanoparticles formation and its characterization. Adv Mater Lett 2:313–317
Singh A, Choudhary M, Singh MP, Verma HN, Singh SP, Arora K (2015) DNA functionalized
direct electro-deposited gold nanoaggregates for efficient detection of Salmonella typhi.
Bioelectrochemistry 105:7–15
Solanki P, Bhargava A, Chhipa H, Jain N, Panwar J (2015) Nano-fertilizers and their smart delivery
system. In: Rai M, Ribeiro C, Mattoso L, Duran N (eds) Nanotechnologies in food and agricul-
ture. Springer International Publishing, Cham, pp 81–101
Song MR, Cui SM, Gao F, Liu YR, Fan CL, Lei TQ, Liu DC (2012) Dispersible silica nanopar-
ticles as carrier for enhanced bioactivity of chlorfenapyr. J Pestic Sci 37(3):258–260
Srivastava AK, Dev A, Karmakar S (2017) Nanosensors and nanobiosensors in food and agricul-
ture. Environ Chem Lett 16:161–182. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10311-017-0674-7
Torri L, Piochi M (2016) Sensory methods and electronic nose as innovative tools for the evalua-
tion of the aroma transfer properties of food plastic bags. Food Res Int 85:235–243
Vundavalli R, Vundavalli S, Nakka M, Rao DS (2015) Biodegradable nano-hydrogels in agricul-
tural farming - alternative source for water resources. Procedia Mater Sci 10:548–554
Wang JY, Wang H, He J, Li LL, Shen MG, Tan X, Zheng LR (2015) Wireless sensor network
for real-time perishable food supply chain management. Comput Electron Agric 110:196–207
Wu SJ, Duan N, Shi Z, Fang CC, Wang ZP (2014) Simultaneous aptasensor for multiplex patho-
genic bacteria detection based on multicolor upconversion nanoparticles labels. Anal Chem
86(6):3100–3107
Xiang C, Taylor AG, Hinestroza JP, Frey MW (2013) Controlled release of nonionic com-
pounds from poly (lactic acid)/cellulose nanocrystal nanocomposite fibers. J Appl Polym Sci
127(1):79–86
Xu Y, Ding J, Chen HY, Zhao Q, Hou J, Yan J, Ren NQ (2013) Fast determination of sulfonamides
from egg samples using magnetic multi-walled carbon nanotubes as adsorbents followed by
liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry. Food Chem 140(1–2):83–90
Yan JX, Guan HN, Yu J, Chi DF (2013) Acetylcholinesterase biosensor based on assembly of
multiwall carbon nanotubes onto liposome bioreactors for detection of organophosphates pes-
ticides. Pestic Biochem Physiol 105(3):197–202
Yavuz S, Erkal A, Kariper IA, Solak AO, Jeon S, Mulazimoglu IE, Ustundag Z (2016) Carbonaceous
materials-12: a novel highly sensitive graphene oxide-based carbon electrode: preparation,
characterization, and heavy metal analysis in food samples. Food Anal Methods 9(2):322–331
Yu HC, Wang J, Xu Y (2007) Identification of adulterated milk using electronic nose. Sens Mater
19(5):275–285
Zeng SW, Baillargeat D, Ho HP, Yong KT (2014) Nanomaterials enhanced surface plasmon reso-
nance for biological and chemical sensing applications. Chem Soc Rev 43(10):3426–3452
Zhang D, Carr DJ, Alocilja EC (2009) Fluorescent bio-barcode DNA assay for the detection of
Salmonella enterica serovar Enteritidis. Biosens Bioelectron 24(5):1377–1381
Nanoparticles: The Magic Bullets
in Mitigating Drought Stress in Plants
Javed Ahmad, Sadia Qamar, Nida Kausar, and M. Irfan Qureshi
1 Introduction
Plants being sedentary organisms are perpetually exposed to environmental varia-

tions and multiple stresses in single or in combination throughout their life. However,
plants develop various mechanisms to respond against unfavorable conditions but
their response varies even in same plant species (Ahmad et al. 2018a; Kollist et al.
2019). Therefore, elevation of stress tolerance in plants is always the main concern
towards sustainable agriculture and crop production. In the last decades nanobio-
technology based applications attracted researcher’s attention in this direction. It is
a new emerging and fascinating field of science, permits advanced research in many
areas, and nanotechnological discoveries could open up novel applications in the
field of biotechnology and agriculture (Giraldo et al. 2019). Further, this is an area
that involved technology of diverse fields at nanolevel. The term nanobiotechnology
was coined by great biophysicist Lynn W. Jelinski and offers an opportunity to
develop tools and technology for inspection and modification of agricultural sector.
Nanobiotechnology creates the alternatives to make the nanomaterials that display
some novel properties (Chhipa 2017). Such technology has large scope in agricul-
ture sector during current food crises condition in the world. The number of applica-
tions is being utilized by scientific community; however, potential use of
nanoparticles needs more exploration in agricultural sciences particularly their
mechanism and role as stress mitigators in plants (Vishwakarma et al. 2018).
Nanotechnology presents an interdisciplinary view of research in the area of life
sciences, medicines, electronics, and energy, for example, transformation of agri-
cultural and food waste to energy, and other many useful by-products via nano-
enzymatic bioprocessing, technology with reproductive biology, biochemical
sensors, cleaning of water, different nanocides used in agriculture and development
J. Ahmad (*) · S. Qamar · N. Kausar · M. I. Qureshi (*)

Department of Biotechnology, Jamia Millia Islamia, New Delhi, India

146 J. Ahmad et al.
of stress mitigator for crops (Kim et al. 2018; Pandey 2018; Shojaei et al. 2019). For
example, fertilizers play a vital role in crop growth and development but most of
their part remains unutilized by plants due to many inherent factors, such as, leach-
ing in soil, hydrolysis, decomposition, etc. Therefore, there is a constant need to
develop novel applications with the help of nanotechnology and nanomaterials to
increase the crop production and to minimize the nutrient loss of fertilizers (León-
Silva et al. 2018; Saranya et al. 2019). Application of nano-fertilizers may provide
alternative to increase resource’s use efficiency and to reduce increased soil toxicity
created due to accumulation of chemical fertilizers and pesticides in the soil
(Pirzadah et al. 2019). Despite advances of nanotechnology in other sectors, devel-
opment of nanobiotechnology and its applications in agriculture sector (Fig. 1) is
still at native stage. However, there is an increasing interest of researchers in this
field. In this chapter, we discuss the recent advances in nanobiotechnology research
related to drought stress alleviation and modulation of crop yield.
2 Nanoparticles (Nano-powder/Nano-cluster/Nano-crystal)
Nanotechnology deals with various structures of matter having dimensions of the

order of a billionth of a meter. Nanoparticles are small molecular aggregates having
dimensions between 1 and 100 nm in size with a surrounding interfacial layer. This
interfacial layer is an integral part of nanoscale matter, fundamentally affecting all
of its properties (Jeevanandam et al. 2018; Baby et al. 2018). Due to extreme small
size they acquire some queer properties compared to their bulk material. The term
“nanoparticle” is not generally applied to individual molecules; it usually refers to
Fig. 1 Diagram showing various applications of nanotechnology in plant science

Nanoparticles: The Magic Bullets in Mitigating Drought Stress in Plants 147
inorganic materials. Nanoparticles are of great scientific interest as they are, in

effect, a bridge between bulk materials and atomic or molecular structures.
Nanoparticles often possess remarkable optical properties as they are small enough
to confine their electrons and produce quantum effects (Sudha et al. 2018).
Nanomaterials have certain properties which make them different from that of the
bulk materials, including large fraction of surface atoms, high surface energy, spa-
tial confinement, and reduced imperfections. Nature knows nanoparticles very well
in the form of clay, bacterial products, and minerals (Hong 2019). It has been uti-
lized by ancient people as a colorant of metals. Various types of nanoparticles are
used in agriculture sciences; however, recently the systematic designed and engi-
neered/modified composite nanoparticles are also used in plant science research
(Fig. 2). The engineered/modified nanoparticles may alter their properties and so
their reactivity, dissemination, and translocation inside the plant are different as
compared to non-engineered/modified same nanoparticles resulted different
responses of plants (Khan et al. 2017). For example, Barrios et al. (2016) reported
that exposure of capping of nanoparticles increases the plant responses as compared
to treatment with naked nanoparticles. Such modified nanoparticles have specific
properties which are not found in the same material. Engineered/modified nanopar-
ticles are constructed with a range of materials and occur in diverse sizes and struc-
ture with the compatibility of extra addition of surface molecules which makes them
unique from naturally occurring materials (Servin and White 2016; Tan et al. 2017).
Engineered nanoparticles have great ability to enter the plants cells; therefore it can
transport DNA and other useful molecules into plant cells efficiently. This area of
nanotechnology opens new potential in the research of plant genetic engineering as
transgenic plant development (Verma et al. 2018; Wang et al. 2016). Carbon nano-
tubes are other important form of nanoparticle and such nanoparticles (carbon
Fig. 2 Various types of nanomaterials: (a) polymer nanoparticle, (b) nano-crystal, (c) nanotubes,
(d) nanogels, (e) nano-cluster, (f) nanoshell, (g) nanogels, (h) micelles
148 J. Ahmad et al.
n anotubes) increased the plants’ capability to collect the range of light energy after
introducing the carbon nanotubes into chloroplast. These carbon nanotubes act as an
artificial antenna which permits the chloroplast to collect the wavelengths of light
besides the normal range, such as ultraviolet, green, and near-infrared (Khatri and
Rathore 2018). The engineered/modified carbon nanotubes also improve the growth,
physiology, metabolism, and tolerance level of plants which could be helpful under
stress conditions (Vithanage et al. 2017). Though, the several studies on nanoparti-
cles to date concern toxicity on plant system (Chichiriccò and Poma 2015; Tripathi
et al. 2017). On the other hand, various studies have shown that nanoparticles have
positive effects on the plant system (Table 1). Nanoparticles can be a potential tool
to be used as nano-herbicides, nano-pesticides, nano-fertilizers, etc. which can
effectively release their content in required quantity to target cellular organelles in
plants (Cicek and Nadaroglu 2015). Different activities including the improper
clearance of industrial waste and improper management of disposal of products by
user can pollute the environment. Several mathematical models are being currently
used to evaluate the discharge of nanoparticles in the environment (Nowack 2017).
The NPs have high surface to volume ratio which improves their activity and prop-
erties. Environmental conditions also affect the properties of nanoparticles such as
stability, oxidation state, precipitation, and aggregation. Hence, nanoparticles can
act differently in different environmental conditions, and consequently their acces-
sibility as well as reactivity in ecosystem is varied (Ealias and Saravanakumar 2017).
3 Abiotic Stress and Nanotechnology
Plants must cope with climate changes and environmental stresses such as drought,
salinity, elevated temperatures, heavy metals, etc. for sustainability and mainte-
nance of life on Earth. Such stresses might hardly occur in single but more com-
monly in combination. Climate change catastrophes impact all aspects of plant
metabolism, growth, and development and thus posing a serious challenge for
developing sustainable agriculture at a time of significant growth in the global popu-
lation (Ahmad et al. 2018b; Roychoudhury and Tripathi 2019). To cope with envi-
ronmental stresses plants have developed a wide spectrum of effective and integrative
molecular programs to sense it rapidly and adapt accordingly (VanWallendael et al.
2019). Such responses can boost up by plant by the interaction of nanoparticles with
plants. Nanotechnology holds the pledge of enhancing crop yield by improving
plant tolerance mechanism under abiotic stress conditions (Khan and Upadhyaya
2019). Several studies demonstrated that nanoparticles play important role in pro-
tecting plants from abiotic stresses through modulation of various physiological,
biochemical, and molecular processes (Fig. 3). In addition, nanoparticles are gener-
ally involved in enhancing the activities of enzymatic and non-enzymatic antioxi-
dants under abiotic stress (Table 1). Many natural biological systems have native
form of nanoparticles such as chemicals derived from soil organic content, nano-
clay, magnetosomes, ferritin, viruses, exosomes, and lipoproteins which exhibit
Table 1 Impact of nanomaterials on plants under drought stress

Optimum
concentration/
Treatment Effect on drought
Nanoparticles duration Plant stress Reference
Cerium oxide 50 or 100 mg/L Sorghum Efficiently reduced Djanaguiraman
nanoparticles 10 days bicolor (L.) free radicals and et al. (2018)
(nanoceria) Moench lipid peroxidation
in drought stressed
plants
Increased leaf
carbon assimilation
rates, pollen
germination, and
seed yield per plant
under drought then
controls
Nano-titanium 10 ppm Dracocephalum Drought stressed Mohammadi
dioxide (nano 50 ml of TiO2 moldavica L. plants treated with et al. (2016)
anatase TiO2) NPs were 10 ppm TiO2 NPs
sprayed on the showed high
plant shoots in accumulation of
each pot for three proline and reduced
successive days H2O2 and
malondialdehyde
content as
compared to
controls
CuO and ZnO CuO, 300 mg /kg Triticum CuO and ZnO NPs Yang et al.
and ZnO 500 mg aestivum L. interacted with (2017)
/kg root-colonizing
7 days microbes and
altered plant growth
and function under
drought
Fullerenol 0.01 and Beta vulgaris L. FNPs worked as Borišev et al.
nanoparticles 0.001 nmol mm−2 intracellular binders (2016)
(FNPs, C60(OH)24) per leaf area of water
13 days Increased
antioxidant enzyme
activities (CAT,
APx, and GPx),
MDA and GSH
content mitigating
drought stress
Colloidal nanosilver 40 g/ha Carum Showed no Seghatoleslami
1 week copticum L. constructive effect et al. (2015)
on plant growth
under drought
(continued)
150 J. Ahmad et al.
Table 1 (continued)
Optimum
concentration/
Composite – – The SiO2 Nps Mushtaq et al.
NPs = SiO2 Nps consisting of (2018)
(core) + chitosan superabsorbent
(first semi- control release
permeable fertilizer was
coating) + sodium competent of
alginate and kaolin releasing the
(outer most nutrients slowly,
superabsorbent withhold good
coating) quantities of water
hence can facilitate
plants control
salinity and drought
without disturbing
the ecosystem
Nano TiO2 and nano 20 and 20 ppm Hordeum Present Ghorbanian
SiO2 vulgare L. investigation et al. (2017)
showed beneficial
effects of TiO2 and
SiO2 on yield and
biomass of barley
genotypes
Encapsulation of 100 μM Saccharum spp. Such nanoparticles Silveira et al.
S-nitrosoglutathione 5, 8 days cv. 99 can be used for (2019)
into chitosan IACSP94-2094 increasing
nanoparticles NO-induced
benefits for plants
under stress,
mitigating the
negative impact of
drought on plant
physiology and
metabolism
Nano ZnO 1, 3, and 5 mg Hordeum The ZnO-NPs Dimkpa et al.
Zn/kg vulgare L. promoted growth, (2019)
4 weeks yield, development,
and fortify edible
grains with crucial
nutrients and also
improved N
acquisition under
drought
(continued)
Table 1 (continued)
Optimum
concentration/
Nano TiO2 0, 10, 100, and Linum Increased Aghdam et al.
500 mg/L usitatissimum chlorophyll and (2016)
3 days L. carotenoids content,
growth and yield,
reduced H2O2 and
malondialdehyde
(MDA) content
Nano TiO2 and SiO2 Nano TiO2 (25, Gossypium Increased pigments Shallan et al.
50, 100, and barbadense L. content, total (2016)
200 ppm) or soluble sugars, total
nano SiO2 (400, phenolics, total
800, 1600, and soluble proteins,
3200 ppm) total free amino
24 days acids, proline
content, total
reducing power,
total antioxidant
capacity, and
antioxidant enzyme
activities and yield
Yttrium doping- 0.5, 0.8, 1, or Brassica napus Reduced level of Palmqvist et al.
stabilized γ-Fe2O3 2 mg ml−1 L. hydrogen peroxide (2017)
nanoparticles 5 days and
malondialdehyde
and increased the
chlorophyll and
growth of plants
under drought
Nano SiO2 30, 60, and Triticum Increased leaf Behboudi et al.
90 ppm were aestivum cv. pigments and (2018a)
applied three pishtaz relative water
times at the stage content, plant
of tillering, stem height, and biomass
elongation and
heading in the
soil and through
foliar application
Nano TiO2 0.1% Triticum Improved leaf Dawood et al.
4 weeks aestivum L. cvs health and growth (2019)
kinetic trait
(continued)
152 J. Ahmad et al.
Table 1 (continued)
Optimum
concentration/
Chitosan 30, 60, and 90 Hordeum Increased the Behboudi et al.
nanoparticles ppm were vulgare L. relative water (2018b)
applied three content, grain
times at the stage protein, proline
of tillering, stem content, catalase,
elongation and and superoxide
heading in the dismutase
soil and through
foliar application
Nano SiO2 100, 200, 300, Cucumis sativus Increased nutrient Alsaeedi et al.
and 400 mg/kg L. uptake, fruit yield (2019)
were applied
from first day
after
transplantation of
cucumber
seedlings
Fig. 3 Nanoparticles operate as signals that trigger the defense mechanism in plants to alleviate
abiotic stresses
range of structures and biological functions (Elsakhawy et al. 2018). Nanotechnology

alleviates the adverse effect of abiotic stress through the re-adjustment of physio-
logical and metabolic re-adjustment of plant cell (Guerriero and Cai 2018). Such
alleviation effect of NPs depends on size, shape, absorption, and dosage (Ahmad
et al. 2019a). However, the molecular mechanisms related to NPs’ protective role
are still unclear. Therefore, understanding of plant defense mechanisms shows the
benefit of using NPs in protecting plants from abiotic stress. Though, the queer
properties of nanoparticles are gaining worldwide attention but the exact mecha-
nism of their interaction with plants at various levels is still at infancy stage.
4 ynamic Plant–Nanoparticle Interactions to Mitigate

D
Drought Stress
Drought is a perennial and recurring feature in many parts of the world including
India. Drought only affects 45% of the world’s agricultural land (Dos Reis et al.
2016). Drought, as an abiotic stress, is multidimensional in nature, and it affects
plants at various levels of their organization. In fact, under prolonged drought, many
plants dehydrate and die off (Takahashi et al. 2018). Water stress in plants reduces
the plant cell’s water potential and turgor, which elevate the solutes’ concentrations
in the cytosol and extracellular matrices. As a result, cell enlargement decreases lead-
ing to growth inhibition and reproductive failure. This is followed by accumulation
of abscisic acid (ABA) and compatible osmolytes like proline, which cause wilting
(Ahmad et al. 2017; Hussain et al. 2019). At this stage, overproduction of reactive
oxygen species (ROS) and formation of radical scavenging compounds such as
ascorbate and glutathione further aggravate the adverse influence (Ahmad et al.
2019a; Hussain et al. 2019). Drought not only affects plant–water relations through
the reduction of water content, turgor, and total water, it also affects stomatal closure,
limits gaseous exchange, reduces transpiration, and arrests carbon assimilation (pho-
tosynthesis) rates (Schulze et al. 2019). Nanotechnology has the potential to improve
function of photosynthetic machinery. Nanoparticles increase photosynthetic rate by
changing the activity of enzymes involved in C3 cycle and synthesis of photosyn-
thetic pigments that could promote carboxylation, reflecting increase in plant growth
(Lowry et al. 2019). Nanoparticles have a positive effect on germination and growth
of plants. Effectiveness of NPs is determined by their concentration and it varies
from plant to plant. Oxidative stress has largely been reported to be implicated in NP
induced toxicity. It could activate a wide variety of cellular events such as cell cycle
arrest, program cell death, modulation of proteins, and induction of antioxidant
enzymes (Jalil and Ansari 2019).
As compared to the water sprayed control plants, the plants sprayed with the
nanoceria show substantial reduction in the contents of malondialdehyde (such as
MDA, a metric of lipid peroxidation) as well as in the level of free radicals (such as
hydrogen peroxide and super oxides) when examined under drought condition. In
sorghum plant, nanoceria foliar spray results in augmented seed yield per plant
154 J. Ahmad et al.
when compared to the water sprayed plants under drought conditions. The nanopar-
ticles of TiO2 have numerous intense effects on the morphological, biochemical, and
the crop physiological characteristics (Djanaguiraman et al. 2018). However, during
the growing period of the spinach plant exogenous application of nano TiO2 pro-
motes rubisco activase activity, formation of chlorophyll, and increased rate of pho-
tosynthesis which ultimately results in increase in the dry mass of the plant (Gao
et al. 2008). It was further stated that the seed yield of cowpea (Vigna unguiculata
L.) increases by foliar application of NPs and TiO2 which may be possibly due to
the augmented rate of photosynthesis (Owolade et al. 2008). Also the activity of
various antioxidant enzymes like peroxidase and catalase has also been found to
enhance in response to nano TiO2 application. As a result of induction of the antioxi-
dant systems of the plant the MDA accumulation is reduced (Ahmad et al. 2019a).
Hence, TiO2 has unlocked new and fascinating horizon for various plant physiolo-
gists or improves the performance of plants even under severe stress conditions. The
effect of nano TiO2 differs in all environmental conditions and may vary among
different species of plant and varied applied conditions. In this context, under con-
trol and drought stress conditions, the influence of nano TiO2 concentrations on
biochemical and morpho-physiological characteristics of medicinal and aromatic
plant dragon head was investigated by Mohammadi et al. (2016). Formulations of
nano-sized ZnO and CuO act as a source of Zn and Cu and thus considered for agri-
cultural applications and can be used as fertilizers. The effects of such nanoparticles
(NPs) showed three way interactions of these NPs with the plants and its microbi-
ome. At various doses that made shortening of root by both NPs, the NPs of Zn
enlarge the formation of lateral roots whereas the NPs of Cu induce the proliferation
and elongation of root hair which are closer to the tip of roots in wheat seedlings
under drought stress (Yang et al. 2017). These responses usually occurred with roots
colonized by a Pseudomonas chlororaphis O6 (PcO6) beneficial bacteria, which is
isolated from the roots of the wheat grown in calcareous soils under dry land farming
conditions. In seedling of wheat plant the drought stress tolerance induced by PcO6
was not reduced by the NPs. Rather PcO6-colonized plants growth with NPs thus
resulted in general increased in the expression of those genes which are related with
the water stress tolerance. The work elucidates that those plants which are grown
under the ZnO or CuO exhibited cross protection for challenges of drought and
metal stress. Emerging approaches for sustainable agriculture thus includes formu-
lations using nanoparticles (NPs). NPs of ZnO and CuO are being reflected as fertil-
izers used to provide vital elements or as pesticides at higher doses. NPs of Zn and
Cu also provide protection in different plants against drought stress (Yang et al.
2017). Although root hair formation is enhanced by CuNPs (CuO NPs) and ZnNPs
(ZnO NPs) raises the production of lateral roots. The reduced length of root possibly
lessens the access to water. Enhanced lignification of wall as described for mustard
and Arabidopsis grown with the CuO possibly alter the flow of water and thus limit
the extension of cell wall. The wall recognized response to the drought stress in
plant is increased lignification. Impairment of the water flow may also be due to the
association of Cu ions with pectins of cell wall (Nair and Chung 2015). Elevated
level of anthocyanin for plants which are exposed to the NPs of CuO is continuous
with the water stress, also it has been documented proline is increased during the
strategy of drought tolerance. The roots of wheat grown with NPs of CuO show
greater accumulation of the free radical in agreement with the fact that plants meet
the challenges for NP results in ROS burst. The increased level of ROS, which fur-
ther suggested the result of elevated ABA triggered by the drought stress, may cause
transcriptional changes and thus leads to stress tolerance (Dimkpa et al. 2012).
Some remarkable results are found in certain studies such as seed germination
and antioxidants increased in barley, soybean, and corn when treated with carbon
nanotubes (CNTs) (Lahiani et al. 2013; Liu et al. 2016). CNTs induced root and
shoot growth of wheat plants (Srivastava and Rao 2014). To reduce the effects of
drought stress on quality and productivity of plants various significant efforts have
been made over the past decades. We further recommend that the nanoparticles of
fullerenol (FNPs), molecular formula C60(OH)24 may help to lessen the effect of
drought stress by aiding as an extra water supply to intercellular cells of plants.
Precisely, the nanoparticles of fullerenol (FNPs) able to enter the root and leaf tissue
of plants, where they are able to bind molecules of water in different compartments
of the cell. This hydroscopic FNPs activity further proposes that the FNPs could be
useful in plants (Borišev et al. 2016; Verma et al. 2019). Such interesting study was
done to investigate the effect of FNPs on sugar beet plants exposed to the drought
stress (Borišev et al. 2016). Findings of this study further suggest that in those plants
which are exposed to the drought stress, the foliar application of nanoparticles of
fullerenol can modify the intracellular water metabolism. In roots and leaves of
drought stressed plants made a significant elevation in the osmolyte proline in expo-
sure of FNPs. These findings further suggest that the FNPs could also act as a binder
of intracellular water, thus generating extra reserve for water and hence permitting
the adaptation under the drought stress. Furthermore, amplification of various anti-
oxidant enzymes in plants including (GR, SOD, GPX, APX, and CAT) indicates the
foliar application of fullerenol may have some valuable effect on lessening the
oxidative effects of the drought stress which further depends upon the concentration
of applied nanoparticles (Liu et al. 2016). The exact mode of action, physiology, and
mechanism of FNPs on plants further studies are needed. However, we can con-
clude that FNPs could directly be more effective on various agricultural practices,
where supply of water is often a limiting factor. In addition, the insolubility of
native fullerene in water is the main drawback for biological applications. To over-
come this problem, derivatives of water-soluble fullerene have been synthesized and
designed which maintain many of the exclusive properties of the native fullerene.
These derivatives of fullerene due to their high solubility in the water represent
attractive nanoparticles for different biological applications (Verma et al. 2019).
Silver (Ag) nanoparticle (AgNPs) is of the most frequently used nanoparticles in
research experiments (Ahmad et al. 2019b). In some research the nanoparticles of
silver have been validated for their inhibitory effects on the bacteria and other
organisms (Beyene et al. 2017). Various researches have demonstrated the effects of
silver nanoparticles on the hydraulic conductivity of plant stem, but on the other
156 J. Ahmad et al.
hand these nanoparticles may be able to penetrate the plant and could hinder the
intracellular compartments and thus cause impairment to cell division (Tripathi
et al. 2017). Hojjat and Ganjali (2016) reported positive interaction of AgNPs with
lentil in drought stress. The germination rate, germination percentage, root length,
root fresh and dry weight were increased under exposure of drought and AgNPs.
The results of Mousavi et al. (2018) showed impact of nanosilver on Tanacetum
parthenium plants under drought stress conditions has reduced the level of antioxi-
dant enzymes may be less requirement of plant for antioxidant metabolism after
exposure of nanosilver under drought. Nanoparticles may directly implicated in the
removal of reactive oxygen species and, as result of purifying these free radicals,
reduce the level of antioxidant enzymes. There is little knowledge on responses of
medicinal plants, particularly in conditions like drought stress. The experiment was
conducted to access the responses of Carum copticum under drought stress by vari-
ous treatments testing the magnetic field and silver nanoparticles. Investigation
indicated that exposure with magnetic field had more yield as compared to the con-
trol and nanosilver treatments (Seghatoleslami et al. 2015).
The nonporous material silica occupy analytical interest due to their great use in
chromatography, biological images, delivery of drug, agriculture, cell markers,
chemical sensors, and enzyme encapsulation (Asefa and Tao 2012). Due to wide
application of the nanoparticles of silica in multidiscipline their production by dif-
ferent methods is receiving researcher’s greatest attention. The nanoparticles of
silica can be used in the field of agriculture, as a silicon source to reduce the salinity
stress in plants which are growing under saline and drought environments (Jeelani
et al. 2019). The nanoparticles of silica have been successfully prepared by both
organic and inorganic colloids. Ultrasonic synthesis of NPs of SiO2 resulted in the
synthesis of minute particles of about 13 nm (Jeelani et al. 2019). This research has
been carried out by modified process of Stober (Sol-Gel) utilizing ultra-sonication
based production of nanoparticle of SiO2 (Noriega et al. 2019). The NPs of SiO2 are
further encapsulated in a compound-controlled release fertilizer used for improving
the quality of agriculture in saline and drought areas (Mushtaq et al. 2018). Silicon
has not been proven to be a vital element for the higher plants, but its useful effects
on the plant growth have been reported in variety of crops including wheat, cucum-
ber, and barley (Table 1). In plants, the deposition of silicon is in the form of amor-
phous silica (SiO2-nH2O) in the cell wall and improves the strength and rigidity of
cell wall and interacts with the polyphenols and pectins (Bhatt and Sharma 2018).
It was demonstrated by Marschner (2011) that in epidermal cell of the leaves Si4+
deposits and thus improving leaf exposure towards light by keeping leaves upright,
whereas in roots it increases the elongation of cell and thus augmenting the elastic-
ity of cell wall. Si acts as a mechanical–physical barrier that can inhibit the penetra-
tion of pathogens or pesticides into the plant cell. The deposition of silicon takes
place on the epidermal walls, surface of leaves, and stem vascular tissues in most of
the plants, particularly monocots and thus controls various physiological properties
of plants.
The nanoparticles due to their unique physio-chemical properties are being used in
the field of biotechnology and agriculture industry. Plenty of studies have concluded
to explore mechanism by which nanoparticles influence on plant growth and devel-
opment. Application of biosynthesized nanoparticles in agricultural field leads to
sustainable development. They facilitate site targeted delivery of various nutrients
needed for better growth and high productivity of plants. Nanoparticle increases the
drought tolerance through enhancing antioxidant system, nutrient uptake, photosyn-
thesis, reduction of reactive oxygen species, modulation of proteins, and signaling
pathway. It is evident from compiled information that the effect of nanoparticles
varies from plant to plant and depends on their mode of application, size, and con-
centration. Also more studies are required to explore the mode of action of nanopar-
ticles, their interaction with biomolecules, and their impact on gene regulation and
expression in plant under drought stress. Another application of nanoparticles in
agriculture can be use as nano-biosensors in the crop protection and nano-devices
for genetic manipulation of plants. However, some reports reflect the negative
impact of nanoparticles on the environment. Therefore, the researchers should focus
on dynamic interactions between plants and nanoparticles and its impact on the
environment.
References
Aghdam MTB, Mohammadi H, Ghorbanpour M (2016) Effects of nanoparticulate anatase titanium

dioxide on physiological and biochemical performance of Linum usitatissimum (Linaceae)
under well-watered and drought stress conditions. Braz J Botany 39(1):139–146
Ahmad J, Bashir H, Bagheri R, Baig A, Al-Huqail A, Ibrahim MM, Qureshi MI (2017) Drought
and salinity induced changes in ecophysiology and proteomic profile of Parthenium hysteroph-
orus. PLoS One 12(9):e0185118
Ahmad J, Bagheri R, Bashir H, Baig MA, Al-Huqail A, Ibrahim MM, Qureshi MI (2018a)
Organ-specific phytochemical profiling and antioxidant analysis of Parthenium hysterophorus
L. BioMed Res Int 2018:1–10. Article ID 9535232
Ahmad J, Baig MA, Ali AA, Al-Huqail AA, Ibrahim MM, Qureshi MI (2018b) Differential anti-
oxidative and biochemical responses to aluminium stress in Brassica juncea cultivars. Hortic
Environ Biotechnol 59(5):615–627
Ahmad J, Ali AA, Baig MA, Iqbal M, Haq I, Qureshi MI (2019a) Role of phytochelatins in cad-
mium stress tolerance in plants. In: Cadmium toxicity and tolerance in plants. Academic Press,
Cambridge, pp 185–212
Ahmad R, Pranaw K, Khare SK (2019b) Effect of nanomaterials and their possible implication on
the plants. In: Plant biotechnology: progress in genomic era. Springer, Singapore, pp 213–229
Alsaeedi A, El-Ramady H, Alshaal T, El-Garawany M, Elhawat N, Al-Otaibi A (2019) Silica
nanoparticles boost growth and productivity of cucumber under water deficit and salinity
stresses by balancing nutrients uptake. Plant Physiol Biochem 139:1–10
Asefa T, Tao Z (2012) Biocompatibility of mesoporous silica nanoparticles. Chem Res Toxicol
25(11):2265–2284
158 J. Ahmad et al.
Baby A, Nazeerudeen S, Ranganath S, Samuel RS (2018) Toxicological impacts of nanoparticles.

In: Emerging trends of nanotechnology in environment and sustainability. Springer, Cham,
pp 77–85
Barrios AC, Rico CM, Trujillo-Reyes J, Medina-Velo IA, Peralta-Videa JR, Gardea-Torresdey JL
(2016) Effects of uncoated and citric acid coated cerium oxide nanoparticles, bulk cerium
oxide, cerium acetate, and citric acid on tomato plants. Sci Total Environ 563:956–964
Behboudi F, Sarvestani ZT, Kassaee MZ, Modares SAM (2018a) Improving growth and yield
of wheat under drought stress via application of SiO2 nanoparticles. J Agric Sci Technol
20(7):1479–1492
Behboudi F, Tahmasebi Sarvestani Z, Kassaee MZ, Sanavi M, Mohamad SA, Sorooshzadeh A,
Ahmadi SB (2018b) Evaluation of chitosan nanoparticles effects on yield and yield com-
ponents of barley (Hordeum vulgare L.) under late season drought stress. J Water Environ
Nanotechnol 3(1):22–39
Beyene HD, Werkneh AA, Bezabh HK, Ambaye TG (2017) Synthesis paradigm and applications
of silver nanoparticles (AgNPs), a review. Sustain Mater Technol 13:18–23
Bhatt D, Sharma G (2018) Role of silicon in counteracting abiotic and biotic plant stresses. IJCS
6(2):1434–1442
Borišev M, Borišev I, Župunski M, Arsenov D, Pajević S, Ćurčić Ž, Djordjevic A (2016) Drought
impact is alleviated in sugar beets (Beta vulgaris L.) by foliar application of fullerenol nanopar-
ticles. PLoS One 11(11):e0166248
Chhipa H (2017) Nanofertilizers and nanopesticides for agriculture. Environ Chem Lett 15(1):
15–22
Chichiriccò G, Poma A (2015) Penetration and toxicity of nanomaterials in higher plants. Nano
5(2):851–873
Cicek S, Nadaroglu H (2015) The use of nanotechnology in the agriculture. Adv Nano Res 3(4):
207–223
Dawood MF, Abeed AH, Aldaby EE (2019) Titanium dioxide nanoparticles model growth kinetic
traits of some wheat cultivars under different water regimes. Plant Physiol Rep 24(1):129–140
Dimkpa CO, McLean JE, Latta DE, Manangón E, Britt DW, Johnson WP, Anderson AJ (2012)
CuO and ZnO nanoparticles: phytotoxicity, metal speciation, and induction of oxidative stress
in sand-grown wheat. J Nanopart Res 14(9):1125
Dimkpa CO, Singh U, Bindraban PS, Elmer WH, Gardea-Torresdey JL, White JC (2019) Zinc
oxide nanoparticles alleviate drought-induced alterations in sorghum performance, nutrient
acquisition, and grain fortification. Sci Total Environ 688:926–934
Djanaguiraman M, Belliraj N, Bossmann SH, Prasad PV (2018) High-temperature stress allevia-
tion by selenium nanoparticle treatment in grain sorghum. ACS Omega 3(3):2479–2491
Dos Reis SP, Marques DN, Lima AM, de Souza CRB (2016) Plant molecular adaptations and strat-
egies under drought stress. In: Drought stress tolerance in plants. Springer, Cham, pp 91–122
Ealias AM, Saravanakumar MP (2017) A review on the classification, characterisation, synthesis
of nanoparticles and their application. In: IOP Conf Ser Mater Sci Eng, vol 263, p 032019
Elsakhawy T, Omara AED, Alshaal T, El-Ramady H (2018) Nanomaterials and plant abiotic stress
in agroecosystems. Environ Biodiv Soil Secur 2:73–94
Gao F, Liu C, Qu C, Zheng L, Yang F, Su M, Hong F (2008) Was improvement of spinach growth
by nano-TiO2 treatment related to the changes of rubisco activase? Biometals 21(2):211–217
Ghorbanian H, Janmohammadi M, Ebadi-Segherloo A, Sabaghnia N (2017) Genotypic response
of barley to exogenous application of nanoparticles under water stress condition. Pobrane z
czasopisma Annales C – Biologia 72(2):15. https://doi.org/10.17951/c.2017.72.2.15-27
Giraldo JP, Wu H, Newkirk GM, Kruss S (2019) Nanobiotechnology approaches for engineering
smart plant sensors. Nat Nanotechnol 14(6):541–553
Guerriero G, Cai G (2018) Interaction of nano-sized nutrients with plant biomass: a review. In:
Phytotoxicity of nanoparticles. Springer, Cham, pp 135–149
Hojjat SS, Ganjali A (2016) The effect of silver nanoparticle on lentil seed germination under
drought stress. Int J Farm Allied Sci 5(3):208–212
Hong NH (2019) Introduction to nanomaterials: basic properties, synthesis, and characterization.

In: Nano-sized multifunctional materials. Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp 1–19
Hussain S, Hussain S, Qadir T, Khaliq A, Ashraf U, Parveen A, Rafiq M (2019) Drought stress in
plants: an overview on implications, tolerance mechanisms and agronomic mitigation strate-
gies. Plant Sci Today 6(4):389–402
Jalil SU, Ansari MI (2019) Nanoparticles and abiotic stress tolerance in plants: synthesis, action,
and signaling mechanisms. In: Plant signaling molecules. Woodhead Publishing, Sawston,
pp 549–561
Jeelani PG, Mulay P, Venkat R, Ramalingam C (2019) Multifaceted application of silica nanopar-
ticles. A review. Silicon:1–18. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12633-019-00229-y
Jeevanandam J, Barhoum A, Chan YS, Dufresne A, Danquah MK (2018) Review on nanopar-
ticles and nanostructured materials: history, sources, toxicity and regulations. Beilstein J
Nanotechnol 9(1):1050–1074
Khan Z, Upadhyaya H (2019) Impact of nanoparticles on abiotic stress responses in plants: an
overview. In: Nanomaterials in plants, algae and microorganisms. Academic Press, Cambridge,
pp 305–322
Khan I, Saeed K, Khan I (2017) Nanoparticles: properties, applications and toxicities. Arab J
Chem 12(7):908–931
Khatri K, Rathore MS (2018) Plant nanobionics and its applications for developing plants with
improved photosynthetic capacity. In: Photosynthesis: from its evolution to future improve-
ments in photosynthetic efficiency using nanomaterials. IntechOpen Limited, London. https://
doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.76815
Kim DY, Kadam A, Shinde S, Saratale RG, Patra J, Ghodake G (2018) Recent developments in
nanotechnology transforming the agricultural sector: a transition replete with opportunities. J
Sci Food Agric 98(3):849–864
Kollist H, Zandalinas SI, Sengupta S, Nuhkat M, Kangasjärvi J, Mittler R (2019) Rapid responses
to abiotic stress: priming the landscape for the signal transduction network. Trends Plant Sci
24(1):25–37
Lahiani MH, Dervishi E, Chen J, 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):7965–7973
León-Silva S, Arrieta-Cortes R, Fernández-Luqueño F, López-Valdez F (2018) Design and produc-
tion of nanofertilizers. In: Agricultural nanobiotechnology. Springer, Cham, pp 17–31
Liu FY, Xiong FX, Fan YK, Li J, Wang HZ, Xing GM, He R (2016) Facile and scalable fabrica-
tion engineering of fullerenol nanoparticles by improved alkaline-oxidation approach and its
antioxidant potential in maize. J Nanopart Res 18(11):338
Lowry GV, Avellan A, Gilbertson LM (2019) Opportunities and challenges for nanotechnology in
the agri-tech revolution. Nat Nanotechnol 14(6):517–522
Marschner H (2011) Marschner’s mineral nutrition of higher plants. Academic Press, Cambridge.
ISBN: 978-0-12-384905-2
Mohammadi H, Esmailpour M, Gheranpaye A (2016) Effects of TiO2 nanoparticles and water-
deficit stress on morpho-physiological characteristics of dragonhead (Dracocephalum molda-
vica L.) plants. Acta agriculturae Slovenica 107(2):385–396
Mousavi H, Fakheri B, Heidari F (2018) The effect of some nanoparticles on the activity of anti-
oxidant enzymes and parthenolide yield of feverfew plant (Tanacetum parthenium L.) under
water deficit stress. Environ Stress Crop Sci 11(4):917–929
Mushtaq A, Jamil N, Rizwan S, Mandokhel F, Riaz M, Hornyak GL, Shahwani MN (2018)
Engineered silica nanoparticles and silica nanoparticles containing controlled release fertilizer
for drought and saline areas. In: IOP conference series: materials science and engineering, vol
414(1). IOP Publishing, Bristol, pp 012–029
Nair PMG, Chung IM (2015) Study on the correlation between copper oxide nanoparticles
induced growth suppression and enhanced lignification in Indian mustard (Brassica juncea L.).
Ecotoxicol Environ Saf 113:302–313
160 J. Ahmad et al.
Noriega NE, Carrillo A, Castillo SJ, Mota ML (2019) Production and characterization of non-
isocyanate polyurethane/SiO2 films through a sol-gel process for thermal insulation applica-
tions. Polymers 11(10):1596
Nowack B (2017) Evaluation of environmental exposure models for engineered nanomaterials in
a regulatory context. NanoImpact 8:38–47
Owolade OF, Ogunleti DO, Adenekan MO (2008) Titanium dioxide affected diseases, develop-
ment and yield of edible cowpea. Elec J Environ Agricult Food Chem 7(5):2942–2947
Palmqvist NM, Seisenbaeva GA, Svedlindh P, Kessler VG (2017) Maghemite nanoparticles acts
as nanozymes, improving growth and abiotic stress tolerance in Brassica napus. Nanoscale
Res Lett 12(1):631
Pandey G (2018) Challenges and future prospects of agri-nanotechnology for sustainable agricul-
ture in India. Environ Technol Innov 11:299–307
pp 381–394
Roychoudhury A, Tripathi DK (2019) Molecular plant abiotic stress: biology and biotechnology.
John Wiley & Sons, Hoboken. ISBN: 978-1-119-46369-6
Saranya S, Aswani R, Remakanthan A, Radhakrishnan EK (2019) Nanotechnology in agriculture.
In: Nanotechnology for agriculture. Springer, Singapore, pp 1–17
Schulze ED, Beck E, Buchmann N, Clemens S, Müller-Hohenstein K, Scherer-Lorenzen M (2019)
Water deficiency (Drought). In: Plant ecology. Springer, Berlin, pp 165–202
Seghatoleslami M, Feizi H, Mousavi G, Berahmand A (2015) Effect of magnetic field and silver
nanoparticles on yield and water use efficiency of Carum copticum under water stress condi-
tions. Polish J Chem Technol 17(1):110–114
Servin AD, White JC (2016) Nanotechnology in agriculture: next steps for understanding engi-
neered nanoparticle exposure and risk. NanoImpact 1:9–12
Shallan MA, Hassan HM, Namich AA, Ibrahim AA (2016) Biochemical and physiological effects
of TiO2 and SiO2 nanoparticles on cotton plant under drought stress. Res J Pharm Biol Chem
Sci 7(4):1540–1551
Shojaei TR, Salleh MAM, Tabatabaei M, Mobli H, Aghbashlo M, Rashid SA, Tan T (2019)
Applications of nanotechnology and carbon nanoparticles in agriculture. In: Synthesis, tech-
nology and applications of carbon nanomaterials. Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp 247–277
Silveira NM, Seabra AB, Marcos FC, Pelegrino MT, Machado EC, Ribeiro RV (2019)
Encapsulation of Snitrosoglutathione into chitosan nanoparticles improves drought tolerance
of sugarcane plants. Nitric Oxide 84:38–44
Srivastava A, Rao DP (2014) Enhancement of seed germination and plant growth of wheat, maize,
peanut and garlic using multiwalled carbon nanotubes. Eur Chem Bull 3(5):502–504
Sudha PN, Sangeetha K, Vijayalakshmi K, Barhoum A (2018) Nanomaterials history, classifica-
tion, unique properties, production and market. In: Emerging applications of nanoparticles and
architecture nanostructures. Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp 341–384
Takahashi F, Kuromori T, Sato H, Shinozaki K (2018) Regulatory gene networks in drought stress
responses and resistance in plants. In: Survival strategies in extreme cold and desiccation.
Springer, Singapore, pp 189–214
Tan W, Du W, Barrios AC, Armendariz R Jr, Zuverza-Mena N, Ji Z, Gardea-Torresdey JL (2017)
Surface coating changes the physiological and biochemical impacts of nano-TiO2 in basil
(Ocimum basilicum) plants. Environ Pollut 222:64–72
Tripathi DK, Singh S, Singh S, Pandey R, Singh VP, Sharma NC, Chauhan DK (2017) An over-
view on manufactured nanoparticles in plants: uptake, translocation, accumulation and phyto-
toxicity. Plant Physiol Biochem 110:2–12
VanWallendael A, Soltani A, Emery NC, Peixoto MM, Olsen J, Lowry DB (2019) A molecular
view of plant local adaptation: incorporating stress-response networks. Ann Rev Plant Biol
70:559–583
Verma SK, Das AK, Patel MK, Shah A, Kumar V, Gantait S (2018) Engineered nanomaterials for
plant growth and development: a perspective analysis. Sci Total Environ 630:1413–1435
Verma SK, Das AK, Gantait S, Kumar V, Gurel E (2019) Applications of carbon nanomaterials
in the plant system: a perspective view on the pros and cons. Sci Total Environ 667:485–499
Vithanage M, Seneviratne M, Ahmad M, Sarkar B, Ok YS (2017). Contrasting effects of engi-
neered carbon nanotubes on plants: a review. Environ Geochem Health 39(6):1421–1439.
Vishwakarma K, Upadhyay N, Kumar N, Tripathi DK, Chauhan DK, Sharma S, Sahi S
(2018) Potential applications and avenues of nanotechnology in sustainable agriculture. In:
Nanomaterials in plants, algae, and microorganisms. Academic Press, Cambridge, pp 473–500
Wang P, Lombi E, Zhao FJ, Kopittke PM (2016) Nanotechnology: a new opportunity in plant
sciences. Trends Plant Sci 21(8):699–712
Yang KY, Doxey S, McLean JE, Britt D, Watson A, Al Qassy D, Anderson AJ (2017) Remodeling
of root morphology by CuO and ZnO nanoparticles: effects on drought tolerance for plants
colonized by a beneficial pseudomonad. Botany 96(3):175–186
Nanotechnology: An Innovative Tool
to Enhance Crop Production
Aarifa Jan, Tanveer Bilal Pirzadah, and Bisma Malik
1 Introduction
Agriculture is backbone of many developing countries with more than 60% of

population depending on it for their livelihood. Due to the rapid increasing popu-
lation pressure, agriculture is facing many challenges for production of more
food due to unpredictable climate change, shrinking of agricultural land, produc-
tivity, labor force, and increased urbanization. With the limited availability of
land and water resources, the Indian policy makers ensure national food security
by allocating 4% growth in agriculture annually. In order to feed the growing
population the need of agriculture-dependent countries is to adopt more recent
technologies which would be labor-saving and increase crop production. Among
the various crop improvement technologies, nanotechnology holds an eminent
position in crop improvement and food production to fulfill the demands in an
efficient and cost effective way. Nanotechnology has the potential to revolution-
ize agricultural systems by precise farming techniques and therefore may emerge
as a possible solution for increasing crop yields. It is the science of manipulating
matter at nano-scale level and is developing as a revolutionary technology in cur-
rent era. Agricultural production may be increased by nanotechnology in an eco-
friendly way even in the challenging environment (Pirzadah et al. 2019). The full
potential of nanotechnology in agriculture is not revealed and need to be explored
to a large extent; this technique can benefit agriculture in multiple dimensions.
Introduction of nanotechnology in agriculture aims at increase in yield, minimal
loss of nutrients in fertilization, and reduction of chemicals for plant protection
A. Jan (*) · B. Malik

T. B. Pirzadah

164 A. Jan et al.
(Chen et al. 2013). Nano-agrotechnology involves the use of nanoparticles (NPs)

with unique properties to increase crop and livestock productivity (Scott and
Chen 2002; Batsmanova et al. 2013). Various plant traits which contribute to
growth, yield, and quality of produce can be altered by using engineered nanopar-
ticles (ENMs) (Gardea-Torresdey et al. 2014).
Nanotechnology has the capability to ameliorate global food production and
food quality through increased plant protection, detection of diseases, monitoring
plant growth, and reduced waste for strengthening agriculture sustainability
(Pirzadah et al. 2019). The use of nanotechnology in agriculture also involves fine
delivery of fertilizers to increase plant growth and yield (Naderi and Danesh-
Shahraki 2013), sensors for monitoring soil quality, and pesticides for pest and dis-
ease management (Liu et al. 2008). The potential of NPs, either metal-based
(MBNPs) or carbon-based (CBNPs), has been documented in many research arti-
cles in relation to their uptake, internalization, translocation, persistence, and effect
on growth and overall development in many plant species of different commercial
importance. Some of these studies have shown beneficial role on plant growth and
development upon exposure to NPs (Kole et al. 2013; Razzaq et al. 2016), while
others show negative effects (Stampoulis et al. 2009; Yin et al. 2011). The beneficial
role of NPs has been reported through the successful demonstration of enhanced
percentage in seed germination (Gopinath et al. 2014), increased root and shoot
length (Hafeez et al. 2015), increased fruit yield (Kole et al. 2013), enhanced sec-
ondary metabolite content (Kole et al. 2013), and a substantial increase in vegetative
biomass of seedlings and plants in many crops. The use of NPs in crop improvement
is still under investigation, its use must been seen on a regular basis in farmers’
fields in the near future.
2 anoparticles as Magic Bullets to Modify Important Plant

N
Traits
Seed germination rate is an important parameter for the initial assessment of the
effects of various nanomaterials on the subsequent developmental stages of
plants. The emergence of radicle and plumule is the initiation of seed germina-
tion and seedling growth. The effect of nanomaterials on plant germination and
growth has been studied by various scientists with the aim to enhance its use in
agriculture. For instance, TiO2 nanoparticles (0.25–4%) promote photosynthesis
and nitrogen metabolism in spinach and, therefore, improve the growth of the
plants (Zheng et al. 2005; Klaine et al. 2008). Engineered nanoparticles (ENPs)
may be classified into the metal (or non-metal) and metal oxide nanoparticles.
Most widely used ENPs evaluated in the field of crop improvement include
nano-ferrous/ferric oxides (Alidoust and Isoda 2013; Bakhtiari et al. 2015),
nano-silver (Sharma et al. 2012; Razzaq et al. 2016), nano-gold (Arora et al.
2012; Kumar et al. 2013), nano-copper (Ngo et al. 2014), nano-zinc oxide
(Burman et al. 2013), nano-titanium oxide (Feizi et al. 2013), nano-cerium
oxide (Rico et al. 2014), carbon nanotubes, and fullerols (Villagarcia et al.
2012; Kole et al. 2013).
Nanotechnology: An Innovative Tool to Enhance Crop Production 165
Carbon nanotubes enhanced elongation of roots in onion and cucumber and

reduced root length in tomato as reported by (Cañas et al. 2008). It was reported that
relatively low doses (10–40 μg/mL) of multiwalled carbon nanotubes (MWCNTs)
were able to penetrate thick seed coats, increase germination, and stimulate growth
in tomato plants which is due to enhanced water uptake efficiency (Khodakovskaya
et al. 2013), surface chemistry of carbon nanotubes (Villagarcia et al. 2012), and
activation of water channel proteins (aquaporins). Pristine MWCNTs enhanced
growth and biomass of maize seedlings at low concentrations by increasing water
absorption and concentrations of the essential nutrients Ca and Fe, but their effec-
tiveness could be decreased by high concentrations of ions/polar species in the
medium (Tiwari et al. 2014). They offered a credible utilization of CNTs for opti-
mizing water transport in arid zone agriculture and for enhancing crop biomass
yields. The diameter and length of single-walled CNTs (SWCNTs) are the major
restraining attributes for their efficient penetration into the plant cell wall. Many
researchers have shown the penetration of chemically shortened SWCNTs into both
the cell wall and the cell membrane of tobacco (Nicotiana tabacum) and periwinkle
(Catharanthus roseus) (Liu et al. 2009; Serag et al. 2011, 2012).
The effect of a carbon-based nanoparticle, fullerol, on agroeconomic traits in
bitter melon was studied by Kole et al. (2013). The uptake, translocation, and accu-
mulation of fullerol were confirmed through bright-field imaging and Fourier trans-
form infrared spectroscopy. The seeds were treated with various concentrations
(0.943, 4.72, 9.43, 9.88, and 47.2 nM) of fullerols; the positive and non-consequential
effects on yield, plant biomass, fruit yield, and component characters were recorded.
Increase in biomass yield 54% and water content 24% was recorded over control
when treated with fullerol, whereas, fruit number, and fruit weight increased up to
20, 59, and 70%, respectively, that resulted in the improvement of up to 128% in
fruit yield. The main factor responsible for increase in biomass and fruit yield is
accumulation of fullerol in the different parts of plant at particular concentration.
The potential of fullerene, C60, and CNTs to improve the water retention capacity,
biomass, and fruit yield in plants up to 118% was proposed by Husen and Siddiqi
(2014). These findings have a remarkable achievement of agri-nanotechnology in
the field of crop improvement.
Different studies have been carried out to study the effect of metal-based nanopar-
ticles (MBNP) such as silver (Ag), gold (Au), aluminum (Al), and copper (Cu) on
plant growth and development (Barrena et al. 2009; Yuvakumar et al. 2011), pro-
mote growth and physiological activities (Salama 2012; Razzaq et al. 2016),
enhance water and fertilizer use efficiency (Seif et al. 2011) and lead to nodule
formation (Taran et al. 2014). SNPs have peculiar application in crop production.
SNPs have a significant effect on plant growth by causing changes at physiological
and molecular levels such as catalytic effects (Ma et al. 2010), decreasing the abscis-
sion of reproductive organs of plants (Seif et al. 2011), and are known to increase
chlorophyll contents (Sharma et al. 2012). Silver nanoparticles are found to increase
root length in maize and cabbage as compared to silver nitrate (Pokhrel and Dubey
2013). Razzaq et al. (2016) found that soil application of SNPs showed positive
effect on wheat growth and yield. Application of SNPs at rate of 25–50 ppm resulted
166 A. Jan et al.
in increase in plant height, fresh and dry weight as compared to control. SNPs also
affected the number of seminal roots in wheat. Soil applied SNPs showed favorable
effects on plant growth which may be due to the more bioavailability and accumula-
tion in plants, thereby stimulating plant growth. Razzaq et al. (2016) further reported
that in order to explore precise concentration, suitable mode, and time of application
to realize growth- and yield-enhancing potential of SNPs for wheat and other crops
in an eco-friendly manner more investigations are required.
Indications of magnetic NPs were found in roots, stems, and leaves under hydro-
ponic conditions, while the plants did not show any signs of magnetic NPs growing
in soil or in sand confirming no particle uptake. Shah and Belozerova (2009)
reported that nanoparticles (Pd, Au at low concentrations; Si, Cu at higher concen-
trations, and combination of Au and Cu) had a positive impact on seed germination
and growth of the seedling of lettuce. The effect of colloidal solution of molybde-
num nanoparticles (Mo NPs) on the microbial composition in the rhizosphere of
chick pea (Cicer arietinum) was studied by Taran et al. (2014) and reported that
seeds of chick pea when treated with combination of colloidal solution of Mo NPs
(8 mg/L) and microbial preparation caused the development of “agronomically
valuable” microflora and resulted in increase in number of nodules per plant by four
times, while single treatment with colloidal solution of Mo NPs increased the num-
ber of nodules twofold as compared to control. Ma et al. (2010) reported the effects
of four oxide nanoparticles (CeO2, Lanthanum (III) oxide-La2O3, Gadolinium (III)
oxide-Gd2O3, Ytterbium oxide-Yb2O3) on radish, rape, tomato, lettuce, wheat, cab-
bage, and cucumber plant species and reported that the nano-CeO2 at 2000 mg/L
concentration caused root elongation in lettuce and did not affect root elongation in
other plant species. The other three types of nanoparticles (La2O3, Gd2O3, and
Yb2O3) at same concentration greatly influenced root growth. The inhibitory effect
of these nanoparticles was observed at various stages of root growth. The need is to
understand the phytotoxic nature of the nanoparticles thoroughly before their appli-
cation under field conditions. In order to avoid the phytotoxic effects of nanoparti-
cles to other plant species the possible solution is to grow the plant seedlings in
greenhouse and then transferring them to field.
3 Intervention of Nanoparticles in Metabolic Pathways
Secondary metabolites have medicinal properties and are also known as natural
products or phytochemicals. It has been reported in various research papers that
most of the secondary metabolites are beneficial for human body and are also con-
sidered as phyto-medicines. Secondary metabolites play a significant role in sur-
vival of plants, protection against pests, insect attack, mechanical injury, and other
biotic and abiotic stresses (Misra et al. 2016). The various secondary metabolites
include terpenoids, alkaloids, and phenolics (Kabera et al. 2014).
A great diversity of bioactive small molecular metabolites is present in plants
that are highly important as pharmaceuticals, nutraceuticals, and agrochemicals. In
some important medicinal plants the level of secondary metabolites is generally

low. Nanotechnological approach especially ENPs are of great importance to
enhance the production of essential medicinal compounds in plants. Although a
number of studies have reported the effects of NPs on the growth and development
of the plant, however only few reported the enhancement of secondary metabolite
production in plants upon treatment with NPs (Nair et al. 2010; Krishnaraj et al.
2012). Raliya and Tarafdar (2013) reported that improved growth parameters and
gum content might be due to adsorption of NPs on plant surface and taken up by the
plants through natural nano or micro-scale openings.
Nanoparticles have the capacity to be used as novel effective elicitors in plant
biotechnology for the elicitation of secondary metabolite production (Fakruddin
et al. 2012). The role of NPs as elicitors is studied by many workers (Aditya et al.
2010; Asghari et al. 2012; Sharafi et al. 2013; Ghanati and Bakhtiarian 2014;
Ghasemi et al. 2015). Ghasemi et al. (2015) and Yarizade and Hosseini (2015) stud-
ied the possible role of NPs as elicitors for improving the expression level of genes
related to the production of secondary metabolites. The most popular groups of
secondary metabolites in plants are flavonoids and isoflavonoids. Heiras-Palazuelos
et al. (2013) reported that legumes are considered as rich sources of these secondary
metabolites. Under in vitro conditions the increased production of secondary metab-
olites (phenols and flavonoids) in gram was recorded on exposure to TiO2 NPs
(AL-Oubaidi and Kasid 2015). It can be suggested that NPs can be appropriate
candidates for elicitation studies of in vitro secondary metabolite production. An
important stress hormone jasmonate (JA) enhances various plant defense responses,
along with the biosynthesis of defensive secondary metabolites (Misra et al. 2016).
Nanoparticles may play significant role in regulating the expression of genes for
jasmonate production in treated cells. Induced jasmonate production may be respon-
sible for enhanced production of hypericin and hyperforin. Misra et al. (2016)
reported that secondary metabolites can be very important chemicals for the devel-
opment of plants. The silver nanoparticles were used for elicitation of levels of
capsaicin. Mediums with different hormonal combinations were prepared and
growth was studied using qualitative analysis using iodine fumes. From this study it
was concluded that the nanoparticles acted as an elicitor and brought about capsa-
icin increase effectively. The production of secondary metabolites through in vitro
methods is widely being exploited. Various challenges are being faced for the syn-
thetic production of the metabolites because of difficulty in decoding the biosyn-
thetic pathway of the secondary metabolites. Therefore, in vitro methods like plant
tissue culture and free cell suspensions in bioreactors are promising methods for
obtaining the product in its natural form.
Considering the major challenges faced by agricultural sector due to global climatic
change, population explosion, and other geogenic activities nano-agrotechnology
has a vast potential to enhance production yield by incorporating beneficial traits in
168 A. Jan et al.
the crops thus improves agricultural sustainability. Nanotechnology involves the

efficient use of fertilizers and pesticides thus reduced the input cost. Moreover, this
innovative technology involves the best approach of precision farming by employ-
ing the use of nano-biosensors which helps to monitor soil, temperature fluctuations
for the effective management of bioresources. However, the nanotechnologists
should focus on the cost–benefit analysis of nano-products and its impact on the
environment besides unraveling the dynamic plant–nanoparticle interactions.
Furthermore, there must be a collaborative approach and open dialog among gov-
ernment, non-government organizations (NGO), consumers, and other stakeholders
regarding the acceptance and support of this novel technology.
References
Aditya N, Patnakar S, Madhusudan B, Murthy R, Souto E (2010) Artemether loaded lipid nanopar-
ticles produced by modified thin film hydration: pharmacokinetics, toxicological and in vivo
antimalarial activity. Eur J Pharm Sci 40:448–455
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):3365–3375
AL-Oubaidi HKM, Kasid NM (2015) Increasing phenolic and flavonoids compounds of Cicer
arietinum L. from embryo explant using titanium dioxide nanoparticle in vitro. World J Pharm
Res 4(11):1791–1799
Arora S, Sharma P, Kumar S, Nayan R, Khanna PK, Zaidi MGH (2012) Gold nanoparticle induced
enhancement in growth and seed yield of Brassica juncea. Plant Growth Regul 66:303–339
Asghari GH, Mostajeran A, Sadeghi H, Nakhaei A (2012) Effect of salicylic acid and silver nitrate
on taxol production in Taxus baccata. J Med Plants 11(8):74–82
Bakhtiari M, Moaveni P, Sani B (2015) The effect of iron nanoparticles spraying time and concen-
tration on wheat. Biol Forum 7(1):679–683
Barrena R, Casals E, Colon J, Font X, Sanchez A, Puntes V (2009) Evaluation of the ecotoxicity
of model nanoparticles. Chemosphere 75:850–857
Batsmanova LM, Gonchar LM, Taran NY, Okanenko AA (2013) Using a colloidal solution of metal
nanoparticles as micronutrient fertiliser for cereals. In: Proceedings of the international confer-
ence on nanomaterials: applications and properties, Crimea, Ukraine, Proc NAP2, 04NABM14
Burman U, Saini M, Kumar P (2013) Effect of zinc oxide nanoparticles on growth and antioxidant
system of chickpea seedlings. Toxicol Environ Chem 95(4):605–612
Cañas JE, Long M, Nations S, Vadan R, Dai L, Luo M, Ambikapathi R, Lee EH, Olszyk D (2008)
Effects of functionalized and non-functionalized single-walled carbon nanotubes on root elon-
gation of select crop species. Environ Toxicol Chem 27(9):1922
Chen HC, Roco MC, Son JB, Jiang S, Larson CA, Gao Q (2013) Global nanotechnology develop-
ment from 1991 to 2012: patents, scientific publications, and effect of NSF funding. J Nanopart
Res 15:1951
Fakruddin MD, Hossain Z, Afroz H (2012) Prospects and applications of nanobiotechnology: a
medical perspective. J Nanobiotechnol 10:1–8
Feizi H, Kamali M, Jafari L, RezvaniMoghaddam P (2013) Phytotoxicity and stimulatory impacts
of nanosized and bulk titanium dioxide on fennel (Foeniculum vulgare Mill). Chemosphere
91(4):506–511
Gardea-Torresdey JL, Rico CM, White JC (2014) Trophic transfer, transformation, and impact
of engineered nanomaterials in terrestrial environments. Environ Sci Technol 48:2526–2540
Ghanati F, Bakhtiarian S (2014) Effect of methyl jasmonate and silver nanoparticles on produc-
tion of secondary metabolites by Calendula officinalis L (Asteraceae). Trop J Pharm Res
13(11):1783–1789
Ghasemi B, Hosseini R, Nayeri FD (2015) Effects of cobalt nanoparticles on artemisinin produc-
tion and gene expression in Artemisia annua. Turk J Bot 39:769–777
Gopinath K, Gowri S, Karthika V, Arumugam A (2014) Green synthesis of gold nanoparticles
from fruit extract of Terminalia arjuna, for the enhanced seed germination activity of Gloriosa
superba. J Nanostruct Chem 4:1–11
Hafeez A, Razzaq A, Mahmood T, Jhanzab HM (2015) Potential of copper nanoparticles to
increase growth and yield of wheat. J Nanosci Adv Technol 1(1):6–11
Heiras-Palazuelos MJ, Ochoa-Lugo MI, Gutierrez-Dorado R, Lopez Valenzuela JA, Mora-Rochin
S, Milan Carrillo J et al (2013) Technological properties, antioxidant activity and total phenolic
and flavonoid content of pigmented chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) cultivars. Int J Food Sci
Nutr 64:69–76
Husen A, Siddiqi KS (2014) Carbon and fullerene nanomaterials in plants system. J Nanotechnol
12:1–10
Kabera JN, Semana E, Mussa AR, He X (2014) Plant secondary metabolites: biosynthesis clas-
sification, function and pharmacological properties. J Pharm Pharmacol 2:377–392
Khodakovskaya MV, Kim B-S, Kim JN et al (2013) Carbon nanotubes as plant growth regu-
lators: effects on tomato growth, reproductive system, and soil microbial community. Small
9:115–123
Klaine SJ, Alvarez PJJ, Batley GE, Fernandes TF, Handry RD, Lyon DY, Manendra S, McKaughlin
MJ, Lead JR (2008) Nanomaterials in the environment: behavior, fate bioavailability, and
effects. Environ Toxicol Chem 27:1825–1851
Kole C, Kole P, Randunu KM, Choudhary P, Podila R, Ke PC (2013) Nanobiotechnology can boost
crop production and quality: first evidence from increased plant biomass, fruit yield and phyto-
medicine content in bitter melon (Momordica charantia). BMC Biotechnol 13:37
Krishnaraj C, Jagan EG, Ramachandran R, Abirami SM, Mohan N, Kalaichelvan PT (2012)
Effect of biologically synthesized silver nanoparticles on Bacopa monnieri (Linn.) Wettst. Plan
growth metabolism. Process Biochem 47:651–658
Kumar V, Guleria P, Kumar V, Yadav SK (2013) Gold nanoparticle exposure induces growth and
yield enhancement in Arabidopsis thaliana. Sci Total Environ 461:462–468
Liu S, Yuan L, Yue X, Zheng Z, Tang Z (2008) Recent advances in nanosensors for organophos-
phate pesticide detection. Adv Powder Technol 19:419–441
Liu Q, Chen B, Wang Q, Shi X, Xiao Z, Lin J, Fang X (2009) Carbon nanotubes as molecular
transporters for walled plant cells. Nano Lett 9:1007–1010
Ma X, Geiser-Lee J, Deng Y, Kolmakov A (2010) Interactions between engineered nanopar-
ticles (ENPs) and plants: phytotoxicity, uptake and accumulation. Sci Total Environ
408(16):3053–3061
ment. In: Kole C, Kumar D, Khodakovskaya M (eds) Plant nanotechnology. Springer, Cham,
pp 219–256
Naderi MR, Danesh-Shahraki A (2013) Nanofertilizers and their roles in sustainable agriculture.
Int J Agric Crop Sci 5(19):2229–2232
Ngo QB, Dao TH, Nguyen HC, Tran XT, Nguyen TV, Khuu TD, Huynh TH (2014) Effects of
nanocrystalline powders (Fe, Co and Cu) on the germination, growth, crop yield and product
quality of soybean (Vietnamese species DT-51). Adv Nat Sci Nanosci Nanotechnol 5:1–7
pp 381–394
170 A. Jan et al.
Pokhrel LR, Dubey B (2013) Evaluation of developmental responses of two crop plants exposed to
silver and zinc oxide nanoparticles. Sci Total Environ 452:321–332
Raliya R, Tarafdar JC (2013) ZnO nanoparticle biosynthesis and its effect on phosphorous- mobi-
lizing enzyme secretion and gum contents in cluster bean (Cyamopsis tetragonoloba L.). Agric
Res 2(1):48–57
Razzaq A, Ammara R, Jhanzab HM, Mahmood T, Hafeez A, Hussain S (2016) A novel nanomate-
rial to enhance growth and yield of wheat. J Nanosci Technol 2(1):55–58
Rico CM, Lee SC, Rubenecia R, Mukherjee A, Hong J, Peralta-Videa JR, Gardea-Torresdey JL
(2014) Cerium oxide nanoparticles impact yield and modify nutritional parameters in wheat
(Triticum aestivum L.). J Agric Food Chem 62:9669–9675
Salama HMH (2012) Effects of silver nanoparticles in some crop plants, common bean (Phaseolus
Scott N, Chen H (2002) Nanoscale science and engineering for agriculture and food systems.
National planning workshop, 18–19 Nov 2002, Washington DC, USA. Available from: http://
www.nseafs.cornell.edu/web.roadmap.pdf
Seif SM, Sorooshzadeh A, Rezazadehs H, Naghdibadi HA (2011) Effect of nanosilver and silver
nitrate on seed yield of borage. J Med Plants Res 5(2):171–175
Serag MF, Kaji N, Venturelli E, Okamoto Y, Terasaka K, Tokeshi M, Mizukami H, Ugent KB,
Bianco A, Baba Y (2011) A functional platform for controlled subcellular distribution of car-
bon nanotubes. ACS Nano 5:9264–9270
Serag MF, Braeckmans K, Habuchi S, Kaji N, Bianco A, Baba Y (2012) Spatiotemporal visualiza-
tion of subcellular dynamics of carbon nanotubes. Nano Lett 12:6145–6151
germination of lettuce seeds. Water Air Soil Pollut 197:143–148
Sharafi E, Nekoei SMK, Fotokian MH, Davoodi D, Mirzaei HH, Hasanloo T (2013) Improvement
of hypericin and hyperforin production using zinc and iron nano-oxides as elicitors in cell sus-
pension culture of St John’s wort (Hypericum perforatum L.). J Med Plants By-Prod 2:177–184
Stampoulis D, Sinha SK, White JC (2009) Assay-dependent phytotoxicity of nanoparticles to
plants. Environ Sci Technol 43:9473–9479
Taran NY, Gonchar OM, Lopatko KG, Batsmanova LM, Patyka MV, Volkogon MV (2014) The
effect of colloidal solution of molybdenum nanoparticles on the microbial composition in rhi-
zosphere of Cicer arietinum L. Nanoscale Res Lett 9:289
Tiwari DK, Dasgupta-Schubert N, Villasenor Cendejas LM, Villegas J, Carreto Montoya L, Borjas
Garcia SE (2014) Interfacing carbon nanotubes (CNT) with plants: enhancement of growth,
water and ionic nutrient uptake in maize (Zea mays) and implications for nanoagriculture. Appl
Nanosci 2:577–591
Villagarcia H, Dervishi E, Silva K, Biris AS, Khodakovskaya MV (2012) Surface chemistry of
carbon nanotubes impacts the growth and expression of water channel protein in tomato plants.
Small 8:2328–2334
Yarizade K, Hosseini R (2015) Expression analysis of ADS, DBR2, ALDH1 and SQS genes in
Artemisia vulgaris hairy root culture under nano cobalt and nano zinc elicitation. Ext J Appl
Sci 3(3):69–76
Yin L, Cheng Y, Espinasse B, Colman BP, Auffan M, Wiesner M et al (2011) More than the ions:
the effect of silver nanoparticles on Lolium multiflorum. Environ Sci Technol 45:2360–2367
Yuvakumar R, Elango V, Rajendran V, Kannan NS, Prabu P (2011) Influence of nanosilica powder
on the growth of maize crop (Zea mays L.). Int J Green Nanotechnol 3(1):180–190
Zheng L, Hong F, Lu S, Liu C (2005) Effect of nano-TiO2 on strength of naturally aged seeds and
growth of spinach. Biol Trace Element Res 104:83–91
Development of Nano-formulations
via Green Synthesis Approach
Tanveer Bilal Pirzadah, Bisma Pirzadah, Aarifa Jan, Fayaz Ahmad Dar,
Khalid Rehman Hakeem, Seema Rashid, Sheikh Tanveer Salam,
Pervaiz Ahmad Dar, and Mohammad Afaan Fazili
1 Introduction
Due to the growing population and other anthropogenic activities, global agricul-
tural production faces many challenges such as decreased crop yield, soil fertility,
soil degradation, low efficiency, and labor shortages due to expulsion from agricul-
ture (Godfray et al. 2010; FAO 2017; Pirzadah et al. 2019). In addition, losses of
biological resources are occurring at an alarming rate, with dramatic effects on
people’s livelihood. The population is projected to reach 8.5 billion by 2030, and it
will be mandatory to generate at least 50% more production to feed such a large
population (Wiens 2016). To combat future food crises, an effective protocol is
T. B. Pirzadah (*)
B. Pirzadah · A. Jan · F. A. Dar
K. R. Hakeem
Department of Biological Sciences, Faculty of Science, King Abdulaziz University,
Jeddah, Saudi Arabia
Princess Dr Najla Bint Saud Al-Saud Center for Excellence Research in Biotechnology, King
Abdulaziz University, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia
S. Rashid · S. T. Salam · P. A. Dar
Department of Zoology, Amar Singh College, Cluster University,
M. A. Fazili
Advanced Plant Physiology section, Department of Botany, Aligarh Muslim University,

172 T. B. Pirzadah et al.
needed to manage and improve the agricultural sector. The exorbitant use of con-
ventional fertilizers and pesticides to increase production efficiency is of course not
an appropriate choice for the long term, as these fertilizers are considered a double-
edged sword, which increases crop yields but at the same time, they have a detri-
mental effect on the soil microflora and thus reduce fertility (Pirzadah et al. 2019).
In addition, it irreversibly damages soil texture and disrupts the balance of the food
web in the ecosystem, which can lead to genetic mutations in future generations.
The increased reliance on conventional fertilizers during and after the Green
Revolution has caused serious problems of sustainability and health risks. To over-
come the disadvantages of conventional fertilizers, bioformulations have been cre-
ated to revolutionize the agricultural sector because of their eco-friendly nature and
their cost-effectiveness (Mishra et al. 2015). Nevertheless, this approach has also
been confronted with some problems, namely the short life span, stability, solubil-
ity, low absorption efficiency by plants, and the high doses required. To combat
these problems, nano-formulations have received an overwhelming response due to
superiority over bioformulations (Auffan et al. 2009). Nano-biotechnologies have
thus become a promising tool to tackle the above-mentioned problems, particularly
in the agricultural sector, to combat global food production and boost the agricul-
tural sector (Shang et al. 2019). Nano-agribusiness is a new field that improves crop
yields, regenerates soil health, ensures precision agriculture, and stimulates plant
growth (Verma et al. 2018) (Fig. 1). Previously, these nano-formulations were pre-
Fig. 1 Various applications of nanotechnology in the agricultural sector (Source: Shang et al. 2019)
Development of Nano-formulations via Green Synthesis Approach 173
pared by a conventional approach (chemo-synthesis) using different chemicals

(ethylene glycol, hydrazine hydrate, sodium borohydride, etc.). However, this
approach has not been considered environment friendly because of the adsorption of
certain toxic chemicals besides, it was considered as costly approach (Huang et al.
2007). A green synthesis of nano-formulations has recently appeared in which
biological entities (microbes and plants) play a leading role in the synthesis of dif-
ferent nano-formulations, leading to the evolution of a new field of nanobiotechnol-
ogy. This sustainable path is gaining momentum because of its growing success and
ease of formulation; it is also cost-effective and environment friendly. The exploita-
tion of organisms for the production of nano-farming paved the way for a new and
innovative approach for the development of these natural nano-agro-products
(Iravani 2011; Pirzadah et al. 2019).
2 icrobes as Nano-factories for the Synthesis

M
of Nano-formulations
Currently, synthesis of nano-formulations using microbes as nano-factories is an

attractive and a promising alternative to conventional approach. The biological sys-
tems for synthesis of nano-formulations utilize mostly microbes since they naturally
produce inorganic materials either intra-cellularly or extra-cellularly, for instance,
magnetostatic bacteria used for magnetite, diatoms used for siliceous material, and
S-layer bacteria used for gypsum and calcium carbonate (Sastry et al. 2003). Nano-
biotechnological way for the synthesis of nano-formulations possesses many advan-
tages, such as use of known microbial technologies and processes for scaling up of
biomass. This is leading to economic viability, possibility of readily covering large
surface areas by suitable growth of the microbes, which is of major advantage in the
field of agriculture for easier production of bioformulations. The green synthesis of
nano-formulations involves the use of microbial enzymes to break down the respec-
tive salts into nanoparticles (Duhan et al. 2017). Besides, these also act as templates
in the biosynthesis process, assembly and organization of nanometer scale material
to formulate precise micro and macro scale structures. Further the organic polymers
can play important role in ecosystems by accumulating biologically important ele-
ments and also by retaining soil moisture after aggregating soil particles (Ding et al.
2015). Extracellular polymeric substances (EPS) play an important role in cell
aggregation, cell adhesion, and biofilm formation that subsequently protect cells
from a hostile environment (Ding et al. 2015). Furthermore, certain polysaccharides
from microbial sources are surface active, and thus attempts have been made to use
them as metal chelators (Sutherland 1998; Prasad et al. 2018), emulsifiers (Cirigliano
and Carman 1984), and flocculants (Choi et al. 1998) in industrial and environmen-
tal fields/domain. Such use of microbial polysaccharides has infused renewed inter-
est in its production and characteristics (Raliya et al. 2013). Worldwide efforts are
being done in this direction to make the nano-formulation technology cost-effective.
The formulation of any nano-formulations should be in such a way that they possess
all desired properties such as high solubility, stability, effectiveness, time-controlled
release, enhanced targeted activity with effective concentration, and less eco-
toxicity with safe, easy mode of delivery and disposal (Torney et al. 2007). Recently,
myconanotechnology has emerged as an attractive field where fungi can be used to
synthesize the nanoproducts which possess great application in agriculture sector.
Fungi play a lead role in the biosynthesis of nanoparticles because of the potent
efficiency in extracellular as well as intracellular enzyme production compared to
other microorganism like bacteria and actinomycetes (Rai et al. 2009; Narayanan
and Sakthivel 2010; Prasad 2017; Pirzadah et al. 2019). Some microorganisms pos-
sess innate ability to survive in extremophilic conditions such as high metal concen-
trations and this is due to some important mechanisms like efflux systems, oozing
out some organic acids that cause precipitation of metals through redox reactions or
chelate formations. However, in case of microorganisms culturing protocol is an
essential parameter, thus standardization of culturing parameters (pH, nutrients,
temperature, light, etc.) is of paramount importance to enhance the activity of
enzymes (Mukherjee et al. 2001a; Iravani 2011). The mode of nanomaterial fabrica-
tion using mycogenic approach is represented in Fig. 2. Several studies reported the
Intracellular AgNO3 Extracellular

Biosynthesis Silver nanoparticle
Solution Biosynthesis
AuCI4– capped with Protein
Ag+
Solution
Ag+
o
Ag
me
Electrostatic
zy
En
reduction
Au+
En
zy Protein
me
Auo
Gold nanoparticle
Fig. 2 Synthesis and fabrication of nanomaterials using mycogenic approach (Source: Pirzadah
et al. 2019)
usage of distinct microorganism in the nano-formulation production and accord-

ingly an appropriate framework for selecting a specific organism for a particular
purpose has been developed (Fang et al. 2019) (Table 1). A number of microorgan-
isms and algae have been reported for the biosynthesis of silver-nano-formulations
(Ag-NP) viz., Pseudomonas stutzeri, Verticillium spp., Lactobacillus spp., Fusarium
oxysporum, Aspergillus spp., Trichoderma spp., Chaetomorpha linum, Oscillatoria
limnetica (Klaus et al. 1999; Mukherjee et al. 2001b; Nair and Pradeep 2002; Duran
et al. 2007; Binupriya et al. 2010; Thakkar et al. 2010; Kannan et al. 2013; Hamouda
et al. 2019). However, the main limitation of this approach involves costly media,
maintenance, purification technique, and labor-intensive.
3 ynthesis of Nano-formulations Using

S
Phyto-Nanotechnology Approach
Recently, phyto-nanotechnology gains a rapid momentum for the production of

nano-formulations because of cost-effectiveness and eco-friendly nature. It is a
promising alternative to conventional chemical approach and more complex cultur-
ing and isolation techniques needed for various microorganisms. Besides, the plant
extract acts both as reducing and capping agent during synthesis of nano-
formulations (Sathishkumar et al. 2009; Singh et al. 2010; Selvaraj et al. 2019).
As plants are rich sources of secondary metabolites; however, the composition and
Table 1 Quality criteria of carriers for the development of smart fertilizers based on microbial
inoculants (adapted from Sahu and Brahmaprakash 2016)
Quality criteria of model carriers of bioformulations References
High water-holding and water-retention capacity and suitable for as Mishra and Dahich
many bacteria as possible/cost-effective (2010)
Free from lump-forming material/near sterile or easy to sterilize by Keyser et al. (1993)
autoclaving or by other methods like gamma irradiation/nearly neutral
pH or easily adjustable and good pH buffering capacity
Available in adequate amounts/nontoxic in nature Bazilah et al. (2011)
For carriers used for seed treatment, should assure the survival of the Muresu et al. (2003)
inoculants on the seed since normally seeds are not immediately sown
after seed coating
For carriers that shall be used for seed coating, should have a good Hegde and
adhesion to seeds Brahmaprakash
(1992)
No heat of wetting/easily biodegradable and non-polluting/supports Smith (1992)
growth and survival of bacteria/amenable to nutrient supplement/
manageable in mixing, curing, and packaging operations
Chemically and physically uniform Bashan (1998)
The inoculant should be non-toxic, biodegradable, and non-polluting, Bashan (1998)
and should minimize environmental risks such as the dispersal of cells to
the atmosphere or to the ground water
concentrations of these metabolites varies depend upon various parameters such as

genotype, altitudinal variation, and edaphic factors. Some plants possess an innate
ability to hyper-accumulate metal ions and reduce them into elemental form via
redox reaction pathway and such a unique property of plants can be exploited for the
production of nano-formulations or detoxify the toxic metals and thus rejuvenates
the soil health (Kale et al. 2013; Kulkarni and Muddapur 2014). The commercial
production of nano-formulations using plant extract is quite easy and less time-
consuming as the isolation and purification technique of plant extract is efficient,
feasible, and biocompatible in nature. Jinghua (2004) reported that patented nano-
formulation (N, P, K, micronutrients, mannose, and amino acids) that significantly
enhance the uptake and utilization of nutrients in grain crops. Deficiency of micro-
nutrients such as zinc is a major problem especially in arid or Mediterranean soils
which are rich in calcium carbonate and thus possess alkaline pH and such condi-
tions cause precipitation of the zinc and thus makes it unavailable to the plants and
therefore is considered as a main limiting factor that causes decline in the produc-
tion yield (Takkar and Walker 1993). This problem can be overcome by the applica-
tion of the zinc oxide nanoparticle due to high efficacy and available form to plants
than using its conventional form (Gangloff et al. 2006; Duhan et al. 2017). Chaudhuri
and Malodia (2017) carried out the synthesis of zinc oxide (ZnO) nano-formulation
using the leaf extract of Calotropis which upon foliar application on various plants
(Azadirachta indica, Alstonia scholaris, Pongamia pinnata) showed a significant
growth. Copper nano-formulations prepared by using Allium cepa extract showed a
positive impact in wheat plants by enhancing germination rate and growth of the
seedlings (Bhanushali et al. 2017). In another study, iron oxide nano-formulations
enhance the growth and carbohydrate concentration in Catharanthus roseus plants
(Naderi and Shahraki 2013). Macronutrients such as nitrogen (N) have been recently
reported to be used as nano-formulations (nano-urea) in China to enhance the pro-
duction yield of some specific crops (rice, tomato, cabbage, celery, etc.). It has been
reported that application of nano-urea in the rice field greatly enhances the grain
yield and N uptake and prevents nitrogen loss (74%) with respect to conventional
urea (Huang et al. 2015). Lahiana et al. (2013) reported that carbon nanotubes
enhance germination rate and boosts growth of plants. Similarly, Benzon et al.
(2015) reported that nano-formulation application in rice fields accelerates growth,
metabolite concentration, and crop yield.
4 Chemistry Behind Green Synthesis of Nano-formulations
The nano-formulations synthesis via plants involves the mixing of the respective
salts with the plant extract which undergo redox reactions and the production of
nanoparticle is indicated by the change in color of the reaction mixture (Fig. 3).
Usually, the synthesis of nanoparticles via plant extract involves the donation of
electrons to the metal ions and resulting in the formation of nanoparticles. During
the biosynthesis of nano-formulations, there is an initial activation period when
Fig. 3 Schematic diagram showing possible mechanism behind the biosynthesis of nanoparticles
that involves mixing of the respective salts with the plant extract which undergo redox reactions
and the production of nanoparticle is indicated by the change in color of the reaction mixture
processed metal ions are changed into their elemental form (zero valent) from mono
or divalent oxidation states and later on nucleation of the reduced metal atoms takes
place (Malik et al. 2014). This is rapidly followed by the amalgamation of smaller
nanoparticles resulting in the formation of thermodynamically more stable larger
nanoparticles while the process of reduction of metal ions continues and further
growth processes lead to the production of nanoparticles in varied shape and size
viz., hexagons, rods, wires, spheres, and cubes and the energy in the form of heat
plays a key role in the reaction (Akhtar et al. 2013). This reaction continues until the
capping agent from the biological entity (plant extracts), which will eventually
inhibit the growth of the high-energy atomic growth planes which in turn leads to
the formation of specific type of nanoparticles. In other words, these nanoparticles
have the tendency to revert to their lower-surface energy state from high-energy
state by agglomeration. Therefore, the presence of large concentration of reductants
and stabilizing agents inhibits the agglomeration of nanoparticles and thus helps the
formation of smaller nanoparticles. However, the morphology of the synthesized
nanoparticle depends upon several factors like concentration of respective salt, pH,
temperature, concentration and source of metabolites and reaction time (Mittal et al.
2013; Dwivedi and Gopal 2010; Malik et al. 2017).
5 Integration of Bio-fertilizers with Nanotechnology
An innovative approach to the use of green manure has been used as a promising
alternative to fertilizers for sustainable agriculture (Mishra et al. 2015). However,
the organic fertilizers possess certain limitations such as low stability, efficiency,
and performance under changing weather conditions and the most important factor
involves the application of high dosage for maximum coverage area. In recent
years, nanotechnologies have become a tool in the agricultural industry to promote
growth and productivity through the design and development of ultra-small parti-
cles possessing large surface to volume ratios and high efficacy compared to clas-
sical approaches. Nanotechnology is an emerging field that has revolutionized the
world and it involves a multidisciplinary approach and is considered as the sixth
most revolutionary technology of the present era (Knell 2010). The world’s nano-
technology industry is predictable, with an estimated value of 75.8 billion US$ by
2020, thanks to remarkable global development (Research and Markets 2015).
There is no doubt that nanotechnology has evolved into the development of solid
applications in many of the aforementioned mechanical segments. At the same
time, nanotechnology can potentially benefit society and change the agricultural
sector. This technology has sponsored that agribusiness sector with yearly devel-
opment rate of 25% (US$ 1.08 billion). Moreover, joining of cutting edge nano-
technology in agro-food business would increase global monetary development to
US$ 3.4 trillion by 2020 (Sabourin and Ayande 2015). This makes it clear that the
role of agro-nanobiotechnology in agriculture is essential, without negative impact
on the environment and other problems of regulation of biosecurity. Agro-
nanobiotechnology is an innovative green technology that offers global food secu-
rity, sustainability, and climate change (Mishra et al. 2014).
6 Need of the Green Synthesis of Nano-formulations
The nano-fertilizers possess the efficiency to reduce nutrient loss via leaching and
prevent brisk modifications in their chemical nature which in turn increases the
nutrient use efficiency and thus addressing fertilizer related environmental concerns.
Moreover, the application of nanotechnology in agriculture counteracts the prob-
lems such as crop yield, food security, climate change, and sustainability (Mishra
et al. 2014). Nano-fertilizers are a nano-structured formulation that delivers nutri-
ents to the plants, allowing dynamic uptake or gradual discharge of active ingredi-
ents. Nanoparticles are regarded as efficient vehicles to carry nutrients to the target
site by encapsulation or in the form of emulsion of nanoscale dimension. However,
the surface coating of nano-materials on fertilizer particles holds the material more
firmly due to higher surface tension than the conventional surfaces and thus aids in
controlled release (Brady and Weil 1999; DeRosa et al. 2010). Cui et al. (2010)
reported that nano-fertilizers possess a great advantage over conventional fertilizers
as they exhibit specificity, reduced toxicity, and gradual release of nutrients.

Nanoparticles have great potential to deliver nutrients to specific target sites in liv-
ing systems. The loading of nutrients on the nanoparticles is usually done by means
of following approaches like absorption on nanoparticles, attachment on nanoparti-
cles mediated by ligands, encapsulation in nano-particulate polymeric shell, entrap-
ment of polymeric nanoparticles, and synthesis of nanoparticles composed of the
nutrient itself. Corradini et al. (2010) evaluated the interaction and stability of chi-
tosan nanoparticles suspensions containing N, P, and K fertilizers which can be
useful for agricultural applications. Kottegoda et al. (2011) synthesized urea modi-
fied hydroxyapatite (HA) nanoparticles for gradual release of nitrogen with the crop
growth. These nano-fertilizers showed initially burst and subsequently slow release
of nitrogen up to 60 days of plant growth compared to commercial fertilizer which
shows release only up to 30 days. The large surface area of HA facilitates the large
amount of urea attachment on the HA surface. Strong interaction between HA
nanoparticles and urea contributes to the slow and controlled release of urea.
Similarly, polymer-based mesoporous nanoparticles can also provide efficient car-
rier system to agrochemical compounds which improves the efficiency and eco-
nomical utilization. Mesoporous silica nanoparticles (150 nm) have been reported to
entrap urea. It has been observed that 15.5% of urea was loaded inside the nanopar-
ticle pores and demonstrated a controlled urea release profile in soil and water. The
study revealed at least fivefold improvements in release period (Wanyika et al.
2012). Zinc solubility and dissolution kinetics of ZnO nanoparticles and bulk ZnO
particles coated on macronutrient fertilizers (urea and monoammonium phosphate)
have been compared by Milani et al. (2012). They reported that coated monoam-
monium phosphate granules show faster dissolution rate.
In the present scenario, the exorbitant use of fertilizers in the agricultural sector to
increase production not only affects the quality of the soil, but also has adverse
effects on the environment. It is essential to improve agricultural production to meet
the demand of the population, without negative impact on the environment, so eco-
friendly synthesis approaches must be considered. Nanotechnology is a promising
approach that has revolutionized the agribusiness sector. The use of microbial
enzymes for nano-fertilizer biosynthesis is gaining momentum in nano-
bioformulations because of its excellent efficiency and cost-effective nature. Due to
the small size of nano-fertilizers (chemically synthesized), a risk assessment for our
environment is needed, especially in terms of consumption in the form of food or
feed. However, nano-biofertilizers appear to be more eco-friendly since they are
synthesized from the biological form, but this does not mean that their risk assess-
ment is not required. In addition, it is necessary to develop more technologies for
the synthesis of nanoparticles containing microorganisms well adapted and adapted
within the rhizosphere of a given plant. This could help to develop nano-biofertilizers
specific to crops/plants (biomimetic approach) and thus help improve yield. This
technology would not only help us today, but also future generations and play an
active role in global food security.
References
Akhtar MS, Panwar J, Yun YS (2013) Biogenic synthesis of metallic nanoparticles by plant
extracts. ACS Sustain Chem Eng 1:591–602
Auffan M, Rose J, Bottero JY, Lowry GV, Jolivet JP, Wiesner MR (2009) Towards a definition of
inorganic nanoparticles from an environmental, health and safety perspective. Nat Nanotechnol
4:634–641
Bashan Y (1998) Inoculants for plant growth promoting bacteria for use in agriculture. Biotechnol
Adv 16:729–770
Bazilah ABI, Sariah M, Abidin MAZ et al (2011) Influence of carrier materials and storage tem-
perature on survivability of Rhizobial inoculants. Asian J Plant Sci 10:331–337
Benzon L, Rubenecia M, Rosnah U, Venecio U, Chu SL (2015) Nano-fertilizer affects the growth,
development, and chemical properties of rice. Intl J Agron Agric Res 7(1):105–117
Bhanushali MP, Jaybhaye SV, Gutte AV (2017) Copper nanoparticles using onion (Allium cepa)
extract and their application in plant growth. Intl J Life Sci 5(4):661–666
Binupriya AR, Sathishkumar M, Yun SI (2010) Myco-crystallization of silver ions to nanosized
particles by live and dead cell filtrates of Aspergillus oryzae var. viridis and its bactericidal
activity towards Staphylococcus aureus KCCM 12256. Ind Eng Chem Res 49:852–858
Chaudhuri SK, Malodia L (2017) Biosynthesis of zinc oxide nanoparticles using leaf extract of
Calotropis gigantea: characterization and its evaluation on tree seedling growth in nursery
stage. Appl Nanosci 7:501
Choi CW, Yoo SA, Oh IH, Park SH (1998) Characterization of an extracellular flocculating sub-
stance produced by a planktonic cyanobacterium, Anabaena sp. Biotechnol Lett 20:643–646
Cirigliano MC, Carman GM (1984) Isolation of a bioemulsifier from Candida lipolytica. Appl
Environ Microbiol 48:747–750
Corradini E, De Moura MR, Mattoso LHC (2010) A preliminary study of the incorporation of
NPK fertilizer into chitosan nanoparticles. Express Polym Lett 4:509–515
formulation, perspectives, challenges and strategies. In: International conference on Nanoagri,
Sao Pedro, Brazil, pp 28–33
Ding Z, Bourven I, Guibaud G, van Hullebusch ED, Panico A, Pirozzi F, Esposito G (2015) Role of
extracellular polymeric substances (EPS) production in bioaggregation: application to waste-
water treatment. Appl Microb Biotechnol 99(23):9883–9905
Duhan JS, Kumar R, Kumar N, Kaur P, Nehra K, Duhan S (2017) Nanotechnology: the new per-
spective in precision agriculture. Biotechnol Rep (Amsterdam, Netherlands) 15:11–23
Duran N, Marcato PD, De’Souza GIH, Alves OL, Esposito E (2007) Antibacterial effect of sil-
ver nanoparticles produced by fungal process on textile fabrics and their effluent treatment. J
Biomed Nanotechnol 3:203–208
Dwivedi AD, Gopal K (2010) Biosynthesis of silver and gold nanoparticles using Chenopodium
album leaf extract. Colloids Surf A Physicochem Eng Asp 369:27–33
Fang X, Wang Y, Wang Z, Jiang Z, Dong M (2019) Microorganism assisted synthesized nanopar-
ticles for catalytic applications. Energies 12(1):190
FAO (2017) The future of food and agriculture – trends and challenges. Food and Agriculture
Organization of the United Nations, Rome
Gangloff WJ, Westfall DG, Peterson GA, Mortvedt JJ (2006) Mobility of organic and inorganic
zinc fertilizers in soils. Commun Soil Sci Plant Anal 37:199–209
Godfray CHJ, Crute IR, Haddad L, Lawrence D, Muir JF, Nisbett N, Pretty J, Robinson S,
Toulmin C, Whiteley R (2010) The future of the global food system. Philos Trans R Soc B
365:2769–2777
Hamouda RA, Hussein MH, Abo-elmagd RA, Bawazir SS (2019) Synthesis and biological char-
acterization of silver nanoparticles derived from the cyanobacterium Oscillatoria limnetica.
Sci Rep 9:13071
Hegde SV, Brahmaprakash GP (1992) A dry granular inoculant of rhizobium for soil application.
Plant Soil 144(2):309–311
Huang J, Li Q, Sun D, Lu Y, Su Y, Yang X, Wang H, Wang Y, Shao W, Ning H, Hong J, Chen C
(2007) Biosynthesis of silver and gold nanoparticles by novel sundried Cinnamomum cam-
phora leaf. Nanotechnology 18(10):105104
Huang S, Wang L, Liu L, Hou Y, Li L (2015) Nanotechnology in agriculture, livestock and aqua-
culture in China- a review. Agron Sustain Dev 33:369–400
Iravani S (2011) Green synthesis of metal nanoparticles using plants. Green Chem 13:2638–2650
Jinghua G (2004) Synchrotron radiation, soft-X-ray spectroscopy and nano-materials. J Nanotech
1(1-2):193–225
Kale A, Bao Y, Zhou Z, Prevelige PE, Gupta A (2013) Directed self-assembly of CdS quantum dots
on bacteriophage P22 coat protein templates. Nanotechnology 24:045603
Kannan RR, Arumugam R, Ramya D, Manivannan K, Anantharaman P (2013) Green synthesis of
silver nanoparticles using marine macroalgae Chaetomorpha linum. Appl Nanosci 3:229–233
Keyser HH, Somasegaran P, Bohlool BB (1993) Rhizobial ecology and technology. In: Metting
FB Jr (ed) Soil microbial ecology: applications in agricultural and environmental management.
Marcel Dekker Inc., New York, pp 205–226
Klaus T, Joerger R, Olsson E, Granqvist CG (1999) Silver-based crystalline nanoparticles, micro-
bially fabricated. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 96:13611–13614
Knell M (2010) Nanotechnology and the sixth technological revolution. In: Cozzens SE, Wetmore
JM (eds) Nanotechnology and the challenges of equity, equality and development. Springer,
Dordrecht, pp 127–143
Sci 101:73–78
Kulkarni N, Muddapur U (2014) Biosynthesis of metal nanoparticles: a review. J Nanotechnol
2014:8. Article ID 510246
Lahiana MH, Dervishi E, Chen J, Nima Z, Gaume A, Biris AS, Khodakovskaya MV (2013)
Impact of carbon nanotube exposure to seeds of valuable crops. ACS Appl Mater Interfaces
5:7965–7973
Malik P, Shankar R, Malik V, Sharma N, Mukherjee TK (2014) Green chemistry based benign
routes for nanoparticle synthesis. J Nanopart 2014:302429
Malik B, Pirzadah TB, Kumar M, Rehman RU (2017) Biosynthesis of nanoparticles and their appli-
cation in pharmaceutical industry. In: Prasad R, Kumar V, Kumar M (eds) Nanotechnology.
Springer, Singapore, pp 235–252
Milani N, McLaughlin MJ, Stacey SP, Kirkby JK, Hettiarachchi GM, Beak DG, Cornelis G (2012)
Dissolution kinetics of macronutrient fertilizers coated with manufactured zinc oxide nanopar-
ticles. J Agric Food Chem 60:3991–3998
Mishra BK, Dahich SK (2010) Methodology of nitrogen biofertilizer production. J Adv Dev Res
1:3–6
Mishra S, Singh A, Keswani C, Singh HB (2014) Nanotechnology: exploring potential application
in agriculture and its opportunities and constraints. Biotech Today 4:9–14
Mishra S, Singh A, Keswani C, Saxena A, Sarma BK, Singh HB (2015) Harnessing plant-microbe
interactions for enhanced protection against phytopathogens. In: Arora NK (ed) Plant microbes
symbiosis. Springer Applied Facets, New Delhi, pp 111–125
Mittal AK, Chisti Y, Banerjee UC (2013) Synthesis of metallic nanoparticles using plants.
Biotechnol Adv 31:346–356
Mukherjee P, Ahmad A, Mandal D, Senapati S, Sainkar SR, Khan MI (2001a) Fungus mediated
synthesis of silver nanoparticles and their immobilization in the mycelial matrix: a novel bio-
logical approach to nanoparticle synthesis. Nano Lett 1:515–519
Mukherjee P, Ahmad A, Mandal D, Senapati S, Sainkar SR, Khan MI, Ramani R, Parischa R,
Ajayakumar PV, Alam M et al (2001b) Bioreduction of AuCl4 ions by the fungus, Verticillium
sp. and surface trapping of the gold nanoparticles formed. Angew Chem Int Ed 40:3585–3588
Muresu R, Sulas L, Caredda S (2003) Legume-rhizobium symbiosis: characteristics and prospects
of inoculation. Rivoluzione Agronomica 37:33–45
Naderi MR, Shahraki AD (2013) Nanofertilizers and their roles in sustainable agriculture. Intl J
Agric Crop Sci 5(19):2229–2232
Nair B, Pradeep T (2002) Coalescence of nanoclusters and formation of submicron crystallites
assisted by Lactobacillus strains. Cryst Growth Des 2:293–298. Nanomed Nanotechnol Biol
Med 6:257–262
Narayanan KB, Sakthivel N (2010) Facile green synthesis of gold nanostructures by NADPH-
dependent enzyme from the extract of Sclerotium rolfsii. Colloids Surf A Physicochem Eng
Asp 380:156–161
Life Sciences
Prasad R (2017) Fungal nanotechnology: applications in agriculture, industry, and medicine.
Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd., Singapore. (ISBN 978-3-319-68423-9)
Prasad R, Kumar V, Kumar M, Wang S (2018) Fungal nanobionics: principles and applications.
Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd., Singapore. (ISBN 978-981-10-8666-3) https://www.
springer.com/gb/book/9789811086656
Rai M, Yadav A, Bridge P, Gade A (2009) Myconanotechnology: a new and emerging science.
In: Rai MK, Bridge PD (eds) Applied mycology. CAB International, New York, pp 258–267
Raliya R, Tarafdar JC, Gulecha K, Choudhary K, Ram R, Mal P, Saran RP (2013) Review article;
scope of nanoscience and nanotechnology in agriculture. J App Biol Biotech 1(03):041–044
Research and Markets (2015) Global nanotechnology market outlook 2015–2020. Available at
http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/globalnanotechnology-market-outlook-2015-
2020%2D%2D-industry-will-grow-to-reachus-758-billion-507155671.html
Sabourin V, Ayande A (2015) Commercial opportunities and market demand for nanotechnologies
in agribusiness sector. J Technol Manag Innov 10:40–51
Sahu PK, Brahmaprakash GP (2016) Formulations of biofertilizers approaches and advances. In:
Singh DP, Singh HB, Prabha R (eds) Microbial inoculants in sustainable agricultural productiv-
ity—vol. 2: functional applications. Springer, Berlin, pp 179–198
Sastry M, Ahmad A, Khan MI, Kumar R (2003) Biosynthesis of metal nanoparticles using fungi
and actinomycete. Curr Sci 85(2):162–170
Sathishkumar M, Sneha K, Yun YS (2009) Palladium nanocrystals synthesis using Curcuma longa
tuber extract. Int J Mater Sci 4:11–17
Selvaraj V, Sagadevan S, Muthukrishnan L, Johan MR, Podder J (2019) Eco-friendly approach in
synthesis of silver nanoparticles and evaluation of optical, surface morphological and antimi-
crobial properties. J Nanostruct Chem 9:153–162
Shang Y, Hasan MK, Ahammed GJ, Li M, Yin H, Zhou J (2019) Applications of nanotechnology
in plant growth and crop protection: a review. Molecules 24(14):2558
Singh A, Jain D, Upadhyay MK, Khandelwal N, Verma HN (2010) Green synthesis of silver
nanoparticles using Argemone mexicana leaf extract and evaluation of their antimicrobial activ-
ity. Dig J Nanomater Biostruct 5:483–489
Smith RS (1992) Legume inoculant formulation and application. Can J Microbiol 38:485–492
Sutherland IW (1998) Novel and established applications of microbial polysaccharides. Trends

Biotechnol 16(1):41–46
Takkar PN, Walker CD (1993) The distribution and correction of zinc deficiency. In: Robson
AD (ed) Zinc in soils and plants, development in plant and soil science. Kluwer Academic
Publishers, Boston, pp 151–165
Thakkar KN, Mhatre SS, Parikh RY (2010) Biological synthesis of metallic nanoparticles.
Nanomedicine 6(2):257–262
Torney F, Trewyn BG, Lin VS-Y, Wang K (2007) Mesoporous silica nanoparticles deliver DNA
and chemicals into plants. Nat Nanotechnol 2:295–300
Verma SK, Das AK, Patel MK, Shah A, Kumar V, Gantait S (2018) Engineered nanomaterials for
plant growth and development: a perspective analysis. Sci Total Environ 630:1413–1435
Wanyika H, Gatebe E, Kioni P, Tang Z, Gao Y (2012) Mesoporous silica nanoparticles carrier
for urea: potential applications in agrochemical delivery systems. J Nanosci Nanotechnol 12:
2221–2228
Wiens JA (2016) Population growth. In: Ecological challenges and conservation conundrums.
Wiley, Chichester, pp 105–108
Nano-agrochemicals: Economic Potential
and Future Trends
Gazala Qazi and Fayaz Ahmad Dar
1 Introduction
The human population is increasing at an alarming rate and the present status being
7.7 billion as per the recent United Nations reports; in contrast to this the agricul-
tural land covering 38.4% as of 2011 of the world’s land area (FAO/WHO 2013) is
shrinking due to rapid urbanization, desertification, abandonment, and mal-
agricultural practices thus, leading to the scarcity of food production. Further, the
farmers find it challenging to generate the adequate money from the conventional
agricultural practices, hence they are forced to use the fertilizers (especially the
synthetic ones) and other chemicals like pesticides, herbicides, fungicides, etc.
indiscriminately which leads to the increase in the yield but at the same time have
the negative impact on the environment causing pollution, biodiversity loss, bio-
magnification, and ultimately degradation of soil quality. So, we are in dire need of
a miraculous product which will eradicate this problem. Nanotechnology can rescue
us in solving this problem because novel nano-agricultural products also known as
nano-agrochemicals can be formulated through this emerging technology. The
agricultural products thus formed are known as nano-agrochemicals which are an
amalgamation of nanotechnology and agrochemicals and have resulted in the pro-
duction of nano-fertilizers, nano-herbicides, nano-fungicides, nano-pesticides,
nano-insecticides, and so on. Furthermore, agriculture is the backbone of develop-
ing nations, with more than 60% of the population depending on it for their liveli-
hood (Brock et al. 2011). Currently, the major challenges faced by world agriculture
G. Qazi (*)
Department of Botany, Islamia College of Science and Commerce, Srinagar,
F. A. Dar

186 G. Qazi and F. A. Dar
include changing climate, urbanization, sustainable utilization of bioresources, and

environmental issues like runoff and accumulation of pesticides and fertilizers.
These problems are further intensified by an alarming increase in food demand that
will be needed to feed an estimated population of 9.7 billion by 2050 (Chen and
Yada 2011).
2 dvantages of Nano-agrochemicals Over Conventional

A
Agrochemicals
Nanotechnology is the emerging science which involves integration of some basic

science secrets and facts at nano-scale level (Rajemahadik et al. 2018). Nowadays,
nano-agrochemicals have gained popularity due to their greater effectiveness com-
pared to conventional agrochemicals thereby making them economically viable and
eco-friendly. Nano-fertilizers are advantageous over conventional fertilizers as they
increase soil fertility, yield, and quality parameters of the crop besides being non-
toxic and eco-friendly in nature and therefore minimize the input cost and maximize
profit. Further, nanotechnology provides many nano-devices as well as materials
which have a remarkable role in agriculture, like nano-biosensors which can detect
moisture content as well as nutrient status in the soil and thus finds its application in
site specific water and nutrient management, nano-fertilizers for the efficient nutri-
ent management, nano-herbicides for selective weed control in crop field, nano-
nutrient particles to increase seed vigor, and nano-pesticides for efficient pest
management (Qureshi et al. 2018). Hence, nanotechnology has greater role in crop
production with environmental safety, ecological sustainability, and economic sta-
bility (Qureshi et al. 2018). The nanoparticles produced with the help of nanotech-
nology can be exploited in the value chain of entire agriculture production system
(Hamid 2012). Nano-agrochemicals have the potential to revolutionize agriculture
and some of the potential nano-agrochemicals which are expected to do wonders in
agricultural sector are discussed as below:
2.1 Nano-fertilizers
Nano-fertilizers are considered as smart fertilizers that play a lead role in the agri-
cultural sector to improve soil fertility, productivity, and quality of agricultural
products (Meena et al. 2017). Nano-scale materials exhibit unique properties when
compared at their bulk level (Klabunde 2002). These unique properties of nano-
fertilizers include their penetration capacity, size, and more surface area than the
identical material found in their bulk form. The reason for the higher surface area is
the minute size of the particles making them very reactive and soluble in nature.
Sometimes, the particle size of the nano-fertilizer is less than the pore size of roots
and leaves, thus increasing their penetration power into the plant when applied even
Nano-agrochemicals: Economic Potential and Future Trends 187
on the surface of the plant and subsequently increasing the nutrient use efficiency
thus minimizes the input cost (Lin and Xing 2007; Nair et al. 2010). Fertilizers
encapsulated in nanoparticles will increase availability and uptake of nutrient to the
crop plants (Liscano et al. 2000). Nanoparticle size below 100 nm can be used as
fertilizer for efficient nutrient management which are more eco-friendly and reduce
environment pollution (Chinnamuttu and Kokiladevi 2007). Foliar application of
nanoparticles as fertilizer significantly increases yield of the crop (Liu et al. 2005).
Nanotech materials are being developed for slow release and efficient dosages of
fertilizers for plant (Tarafdar et al. 2012). Slow-release fertilizers are excellent alter-
natives to soluble fertilizers as nutrients are released at a slower rate throughout the
crop growth; plants are able to take up most of the nutrients without wastage by
leaching.
2.2 Nano-herbicides
Nano-herbicides are promising alternative to conventional herbicides as they are

effective to eradicate the weeds, thus plays a pivotal role in the weed management
program (Berekaa 2015). These eradicate the weeds by either destroying their gene
banks in the soil or prevent their germination. Owing to their minute size these
nano-herbicides have the capacity to mingle with the soil and thus destroy the weeds
in an eco-friendly manner without leaving any toxic residues besides these smart
chemicals help to eradicate those weeds which have become resistant to conven-
tional herbicides. For instance, alginate/chitosan based nanoparticles can be used as
herbicide carrier material especially for herbicide such as paraquat (Ghaly 2009).
2.3 Nano-fungicides
Plant diseases have caused severe losses to humans ever since the beginning of
agriculture (Dangl and Jones 2001) and these pathogens are able to contaminate any
plant tissue at different stages of crop growth (Francisco et al. 2007). The main
causative agents include fungi, bacteria, viruses, protozoa, and plant parasites; how-
ever, the fungi plays a dominant role and it has been reported that approximately
85% of all plant diseases are fungal in nature (Giraud et al. 2010; van Bruggen and
Finckh 2016; Parul et al. 2017). Kamel and Mousa (2015) reported that phyto-
pathogenic fungi comprise an important group of plant pathogens that cause
approximately $45 billion losses in crop yield every year all over the world. To
combat fungal diseases, farmers have been evolving their practices by using various
types of chemical fungicides such as mancozeb (Pirozzi et al. 2016), kitazin (Bass
et al. 1981), and copper hydroxide (Capinera and Dickens 2016) but the main limi-
tation of using these conventional fungicides involves developing resistance by the
microorganism against the particular fungicide thereby declines the crop yield
(Wiesner-Hanks and Nelson 2016). Moreover, the plants develop the resistance to
fungicides either instantly or slowly. Thus, farmers either use single or a blend of
fungicides or in bulk quantities to control various fungal diseases which can lead to
either damaged crops or accumulation of residues in the plant which in turn enters
food chain and causes detrimental effects to human health (Shukla and Arora 2001;
Ragsdale and Sisler 1994; Lundqvist et al. 2016). Thus, with the escalating demand
to control these fungal pathogens, there is a dire need to control the excessive usage
of fungicides by discovering eco-friendly substitutes. Nanoparticle (NP) based
materials have received increasing attention due to their unique physical and chemi-
cal properties, which differ significantly from their conventional macroscale coun-
terparts (Phogat et al. 2016). Due to the antimicrobial properties of these nano-based
materials, they find great applications in the agricultural sector by controlling vari-
ous diseases (Panacek et al. 2009; Gutierrez et al. 2010; He et al. 2011; Wani and
Shah 2012; Kanhed et al. 2014). However, Parul et al. (2017) reported the limited
application of these smart chemicals in agriculture due to their cytotoxicity in plants.
2.4 Nano-pesticides
The nanotechnology has helped in making efficacious pesticides and prevention of

their dangerous dissemination in the environment by placing these pesticides in
nanometer capsules which can accurately control the rate of pesticide release from
the capsule as per need of crops (Alfadul et al. 2017). Nano-encapsulated pesticide
formulation is able to reduce the dosage of pesticides and human exposure to them,
which is eco-friendly for crop protection (Nuruzzaman et al. 2016).
2.5 Nano-insecticides
Insecticides are the substances which are toxic in nature and are primarily used to
kill insects that can cause various diseases in plants. It is estimated that insect causes
an estimated loss of 14% which is approximately about US$ 2000 billion/annum in
crop yield worldwide and thus affects the agricultural economics (Pimentel 2009;
Kamel and Mousa 2015). To combat such a huge loses, insecticides are considered
to be the main factor for increasing the agricultural productivity in the twentieth
century. Further, nanoparticles as potential insecticides have been reported to play a
lead role in insect pest management (Bhattacharyya et al. 2010). Nanotechnology in
the management of polyphagous pest such as Helicoverpa armigera has been earlier
reported (Vinutha et al. 2013). Synthesized silver nanoparticles possessed excellent
anti-lice and mosquito larvicidal activity (Jayaseelan et al. 2011). Nano-
encapsulation helps slow release of a chemical to the particular host for insect pest
control through release mechanisms that include dissolution, biodegradation,

diffusion, and osmotic pressure with specific pH (Vidyalakshmi et al. 2009).
Nanoparticles loaded with garlic essential oil proved effective against Tribolium
castaneum Herbst (Yang et al. 2009). Nanocopper particles suspended in water have
been used since 1931, in a product commercially known as Bouisol as fungicide in
the growing of grapes and fruit trees (Hatschek 1931).
3 Economic Importance of Nano-agrochemicals
Nano-agrochemicals owing to their enormous benefits in agriculture have helped

the farmers economically by increasing the yield of crops both qualitatively and
quantitatively thereby substituting synthetic fertilizers and pesticides in order to
maximize the output and conserve the input which leads to economic prosperity.
Reports of BCC (Business Communications Company) research released in 2016
indicated that the global nanotechnology market will reach $90.5 billion by 2021
from $39.2 billion in 2016 at an annual growth rate of 18.2%. The nanotechnology
market is expected to grow by 30% annually and is expected to increase in near
future due to its immense applications in the agro-industry (Shalini 2006).
Nowadays, farmers are being exposed to the new innovations, formulations, and
technologies which help them to increase the economic benefits from their farming
practices. One such technology is the nanotechnology and as discussed earlier nano-
agrochemicals have proved to be a boon for farmers as they tend to increase the
production yield. Possible agri-food nanotechnology applications include nano-
sensors/nano-biosensors for detecting pathogens and soil quality and plant health
monitoring, nano-porous zeolites for slow release and efficient dosage of water and
fertilizers for plants and of nutrients and drugs for livestock, nano-capsules for agro-
chemical delivery, creating biofuels, nano-composites for plastic film coatings used
in food packaging, antimicrobial nano-emulsions for applications in decontamina-
tion of food, nano-biosensors for identification of pathogen contamination, and
improving plant and animal breeding (Bhupinder 2014). The development of high-
tech nano-devices would certainly lead to a revolution in agricultural practices, and
could possibly contribute in reducing the impact of modern agriculture on the envi-
ronment (Scott and Chen 2002; Sekhon 2014; Liu and Lal 2015). The extent to
which nano-agrochemicals develop will be strongly influenced by the regulatory
system that controls their entry into the market and at present, great geographical
discrepancies, which may eventually shape applications emerging in a given market
(Watson et al. 2011). However, industry has a key role to play, for instance, by sup-
plying the necessary data and product information, and sharing their technical, sci-
entific, and policy expertise (Watson et al. 2011). The introduction of nanotechnology
(nano-agrochemicals) in the agricultural sector has already paved a way to increase
agricultural productivity and to protect the environment at the same time. The use of
nano-materials has improved the quality of the environment and helped to detect
and remediate polluted sites; however, only a small number of nano-materials
demonstrated potential toxic effects (Mura et al. 2013).
4 Nano-agrochemicals and Environment
The use of nano-agrochemicals benefits the agriculture but at the same time it also
has negative impact on the environment. The possible reasons being the size of
these nanoparticles which can easily find their way into the living organisms, mak-
ing them dangerous. The nano-agrochemicals are the novel products and the farm-
ers are not aware about their benefits yet. Further, their use has the stigma attached
to them due to the lack of awareness about them, thus these are not used exten-
sively. Moreover, agro-nanotech innovative products are experiencing difficulties
in reaching the market, making agriculture still a marginal sector for nanotechnol-
ogy (Claudia et al. 2015). The reason being the high investments involved in manu-
facturing nano-agrochemicals, lack of knowledge about the benefits associated
with their use, legislative unpredictability, and most importantly their acceptance
by the common man. Agrochemicals are an integral part of agriculture, but till date
nano-agrochemicals have received less attention in this sector. Due to their direct
and intentional application in the environment, nano-agrochemicals may be
regarded as critical in terms of possible environmental impact, as they represent the
only intentional diffuse source of engineered nanoparticles in the environment
(Kah et al. 2013).
5 Conclusion and Future Perspectives
It can be concluded that nanotechnology will have a bright future in agriculture

because of the world’s unquenchable thirst for compact, efficient, and eco-friendly
agrochemicals to meet the needs of growing human populations and shrinking agri-
cultural land area. However, nano-agrochemicals are still in its infancy and are fac-
ing obstruction to reach the farmers. In near future, novel agro-formulations like
organic based nano-materials with greater benefits are believed to transform and
upgrade agriculture to a greater extent across the world. In contrast, it can also be
predicted that nano-agrochemicals have the ability to become pollutants, because of
their miniature size, that makes them toxic and therefore extensive research needs to
be performed before they reach the farmers for application in the field. Further,
market oriented inventions in the field of nanotechnology will create more eco-
nomic opportunities. All scientific discoveries do not make it to the markets easily
because a scientist can make an innovative product but he is not necessarily well
equipped with skill of marketing the same. So, scientific discoveries should take the
help of the marketing professionals in order to transform the scientific discovery
into the commercially viable product.
References
Alfadul SM, Altahir OS, Khan M (2017) Application of nanotechnology in the field of food pro-
duction. Acad J Sci Res 5(7):143–154
Bass RJ, Koch RC, Richards HC, Thorpe JE (1981) Tricyclic amides: a new class of systemic
fungicides active against rice blast disease. J Agric Food Chem 29(3):576–579
Berekaa MM (2015) Nanotechnology in food industry; advances in food processing, packaging
and food safety. Int J Curr Microbiol App Sci 4(5):345–357
Bhattacharyya A, Bhaumik A, Rani PU, Mandal S, Epidi TT (2010) Nanoparticles-a recent
approach to insect pest control. Afr J Biotechnol 9(24):3489–3493
Bhupinder SS (2014) Nanotechnology in Agri-food production: an overview. Nanotechnol Sci
Appl 7:31–53
Brock DA, Douglas TE, Queller DC, Strassmann JE (2011) Primitive agriculture in a social
amoeba. Nature 469:393–396
Capinera JL, Dickens K (2016) Some effects of copper-based fungicides on plant feeding terres-
trial molluscs: a role for repellents in mollusc management. Crop Prot 83:76–82
Chen H, Yada R (2011) Nanotechnologies in agriculture: new tools for sustainable development.
Trends Food Sci Technol 22:585–594
Chinnamuttu CR, Kokiladevi E (2007) Weed management through nanoherbicides. In: Application
of nanotechnology in agriculture, vol 10. Tamil Nadu Agricultural University, Coimbatore,
pp 978–981
Claudia P, Mauro V, Emilio RC (2015) Agricultural nanotechnologies: what are the current pos-
sibilities? Nano Today 10:124–127
Dangl JL, Jones JD (2001) Plant pathogens and integrated defence responses to infection. Nature
14:826–833
FAO/WHO (2013) Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations and World Health
Organization. State of the art on the initiatives and activities relevant to risk assessment and risk
management of nanotechnologies in the food and agriculture sectors, in FAO/WHO Technical
Paper. Available online at http://www.fao.org/docrep/018/i3281e/i3281e.pdf
Francisco JFA, MaríaCarbú CG, Inmaculada V, Jesús MC (2007) Proteomic advances in phyto-
pathogenic Fungi. Curr Proteomics 4(2):79–88
Ghaly AE (2009) The black cutworm as a potential human food. Am J Biochem Biotechnol 5(4):
210–220
Giraud T, Gladieux P, Gavrilets S (2010) Linking the emergence of fungal plant diseases with
ecological speciation. Trends Ecol Evol 25(7):387–395
Gutierrez FM, Olive PL, Banuelos A, Orrantia E, Nino N, Sanchez EM, Ruiz F, Bach H, Gay YA
(2010) Synthesis, characterization, and evaluation of antimicrobial and cytotoxic effect of sil-
ver and titanium nanoparticles. Nanomedicine 6:681–688
Hamid RB (2012) Study effects of nitrogen fertilizer management under nano iron chelate foliar
spraying on yield and yield components of eggplant (Solanum melongena L.). ARPN J Agric
Biol Sci 7(4):233–237
Hatschek E (1931) Inventor, Electro Chem. Processes, Ltd, assignee. British patent no 392, 556.
Nov 17, 1931. Brouisol
He L, Liu Y, Mustapha A, Lin M (2011) Antifungal activity of zinc oxide nanoparticles against
Botrytis cinerea and Penicillium expansum. Microbiol Res 166(3):207–215
Jayaseelan C, Rahuman AA, Rajakumar G, Vishnu KA, Santhoshkumar T, Marimuthu S, Bagavan

A, Kamaraj C, Zahir AA, Elango G (2011) Synthesis of pediculocidal and larvicidal silver
nanoparticles by leaf extract from heartleaf moonseed plant, Tinospora cordifolia Miers.
Parasitol Res 109(1):185–194
Kah M, Beulke S, Tiede K, Hofmann T (2013) Nanopesticides: state of knowledge, environmental
fate and exposure modelling. Crit Rev Environ Sci Technol 43:1823–1867
Kamel AAE, Mousa AA (2015) Nanobiofungicides: is it the next-generation of fungicides. J
Nanotechnol Mater Sci 2:1–3
Kanhed P, Birla S, Gaikwad S, Gade A, Amedea BS, Rubilar O (2014) In vitro antifungal efficacy
of copper nanoparticles against selected crop pathogenic fungi. Mater Lett 115:13–17
Klabunde KJ (2002) Nanoscale materials in chemistry. Wiley, New York, p 1
Lin D, Xing B (2007) Phytotoxicity of nano-pesticides: inhibition of seed germination and root
Liscano JF, Wilson CE, Norman RJ, Slaton NA (2000) Zinc availability to rice from seven granular
fertilizers. AAES Res Bulletin 963:1–31
Liu XM, Zhang FD, Zhang SQ, He XS, Fang R, Feng Z (2005) Effects of Nano-ferric oxide on the
growth and nutrients absorption of peanut. Plant Nutr Fert Sci 11:14–18
Lundqvist J, Hellman B, Oskarsson A (2016) Fungicide prochloraz induces oxidative stress and
DNA damage in vitro. Food Chem Toxicol 91:36–41
Meena DS, Gautam C, Patidar OP, Meena HM, Prakasha G, Vishwajith M (2017) Nano-fertilizers
is a new way to increase nutrients use efficiency in crop production. Int J Agric Sci 9(7):75–91
Mura S, Seddaiu G, Bacchini F, Roggero PP, Greppi GF (2013) Advances of nanotechnology in
agro-environmental studies. Ital J Agron 8(3):18
Nuruzzaman M, Mohammad MR, Yanju L, Ravi N (2016) Nanoencapsulation, nano-guard for
pesticides: a new window for safe application. J Agric Food Chem 64(7):1447–1483
Panacek A, Kolar M, Vecerova R, Prucek R, Soukupova J, Krystof V (2009) Antifungal activity of
silver nanoparticles against Candida spp. Biomaterials 30:6333–6340
Parul S, Adikshita S, Monica S, Nikhil B, Pedro E, Aditya J, Preeti T, Atul T (2017) Nanomaterial
fungicides: in vitro and in vivo antimycotic activity of cobalt and nickel nanoferrites on phyto-
pathogenic fungi. Global Chall 1(9):1–7
Phogat N, Khan SA, Shankar S, Ansary AA, Uddin I (2016) Fate of inorganic nanoparticles in
agriculture. Adv Mater Lett 7(1):03–12
Pimentel D (2009) Pesticide and pest control. In: Peshin P, Dhawan AK (eds) Integrated pest
management: innovation-development process. Springer, Dordrecht, pp 83–87
Pirozzi AV, Stellavato A, La Gatta A, Lamberti M, Schiraldi C (2016) Mancozeb, a fungicide
routinely used in agriculture, worsens nonalcoholic fatty liver disease in the human HepG2
cell mode. Toxicol Lett 249:1–4
Ragsdale NN, Sisler HD (1994) Social and political implications of managing plant diseases with
decreased availability of fungicides in the United States. Annu Rev Phytopathol 32:545–557
Rajemahadik VA, Chavan SA, More VG, Chavan VG, Chavan AP, Shetye VN (2018)
Nanotechnology: innovative approach in crop nutrition management. Int J Agric Sci 10(8):
0975–9107
Scott N, Chen H (2002) Nanoscale science and engineering for agriculture and food systems. In:
Report Submitted to Cooperative State Research, Education and Extension Service of the US
Department of Agriculture. Available online at http://www.nseafs.cornell.edu/web.roadmap.
pdf
Sekhon BS (2014) Nanotechnology in Agri-food production: an overview. Nanotechnol Sci Appl
7:31–53
Shalini S (2006) Nanotechnology: basic science to emerging technology. APH Publishing, New
Delhi, p 121
Shukla Y, Arora A (2001) Transplacental carcinogenic potential of the carbamate fungicide man-
cozeb. J Environ Pathol Toxicol Oncol 20(2):127–131
Tarafdar JC, Agarwal A, Raliya R, Kumar P, Burman U, Kaul RK (2012) ZnO nanoparticles
induced synthesis of polysaccharides and phosphatases by Aspergillus Fungi. Adv Sci Eng
Med 4:1–5
van Bruggen AH, Finckh MR (2016) Plant diseases and management approaches in organic farm-
ing systems. Annu Rev Phytopathol 4:25–54
Vidyalakshmi R, Bhakyaraj R, Subhasree RS (2009) Encapsulation “the future of probiotics” – a
review. Adv Biol Res 3(3–4):96–103
Vinutha JS, Bhagat D, Bakthavatsalam N (2013) Nanotechnology in the management of polypha-
gous pest Helicoverpa armigera. J Acad Indus Res 1(10):606–608
Wani AH, Shah MA (2012) A unique and profound effect of MgO and ZnO nanoparticles on some
plant pathogenic fungi. J Appl Pharma Sci 02(03):40–44
Watson SB, Gergely A, Janus ER (2011) Where is “Agronanotechnology” heading in the United
States and European Union. Nat Resour Environ 26:8–12
Wiesner-Hanks T, Nelson R (2016) Multiple disease resistance in plants. Annu Rev Phytopathol
54:229–252
Yang FL, Li XG, Zhu F, Lei CL (2009) Structural characterization of nanoparticles loaded with gar-
lic essential oil and their insecticidal activity against Tribolium castaneum Herbst. (Coleoptera:
Tenebrionidae). J Agric Food Chem 57(21):10156–10162
CRISPR/Cas9: A New Revolutionary
Science in Agricultural and Horticulture
Quazi Mohammad Imranul Haq and Touseef Hussain
1 Introduction
For the past few decades, plant biotechnologists unravel our understanding of
biology of the plants and have made crop plants with valuable novel agricultural and
nutritional traits that are valuable to the farmers, consumers, and the environment to
boost the sustainability (Ronald 2011). Biotechnology acts as an important tool to
offer innovation and economic ways to produce a diverse range of new products.
The plants with abiotic stress tolerance, disease, pest, herbicide resistance, and bet-
ter nutritional profile have been produced through transgenic integration and RNA
interference (RNAi)-gene silencing approaches (Sedeek et al. 2019). However,
transgenic plants or genetically modified organisms (GMOs) are mostly produced
with a single transgene inserted into the plant genome, and the transgenes are often
from heterologous organisms. It is difficult to engineer plants that are resistant to
more than one pest through the single transgene integration. Tolerant engineering
plant is also a challenge because of a multiple environmental stresses, such as heat,
drought, heavy metal, and salinity because there are complex responses from plants
to stress (Pandey et al. 2017). Additionally, the integration of transgenes is random
in the genome and difficult to control. Technologies other than transgene integration
should be explored to better engineer stress tolerance and pest resistance in plants.
Increasing public concern regarding genetically modified organisms (GMOs)
should also be addressed (Bawa and Anilakumar 2012). Whole genome information
and functional genomics have greatly enhanced our ability to engineer plant
Q. M. I. Haq (*)
Department of Biological Sciences and Chemistry, College of Arts and Sciences,
University of Nizwa, Nizwa, Oman
T. Hussain
Plant Pathology and Nematology Section, Department of Botany, Aligarh Muslim University,
Aligarh, U.P., India

196 Q. M. I. Haq and T. Hussain
genomes in the past decade. As more information on the molecular mechanisms

between plant and pest/stress interactions becomes available, it is feasible to manip-
ulate plant genomes by disrupting the host factors that contribute to the pest and
stress interactions. RNAi technology has been used to produce plants that are resis-
tant to diseases because RNAi normally leads to downregulation rather than com-
plete inhibition of target genes.
The new, exciting, and amazing gene editing technology known as Clustered
Regularly Interspaced Short Palindromic Repeats/CRISPR-associated (CRISPR/
Cas9) system that came into existence recently can potentially solve the problems
encountered by conventional transgene and RNAi technologies. CRISPR/Cas9 sys-
tem is usually used to refer to a revolutionary genome editing technique that enables
efficient and accurate genomic modifications in a wide variety of organisms and
tissues (Sedeek et al. 2019). CRISPR is the section of the genetic code, in which
there is small duplication of the base sequence, followed by spacer DNA segments.
It uses a synthetic guide RNA to introduce a double strand brake to a specific loca-
tion within the strands of DNA. Cas9 had discovered several restrictions nucleases
(or molecular scissors) that enable CRISPR genome editing. The CRISPR/Cas9
system has been adapted as a powerful tool that brings the genome modifications to
the mainstream. In the implementation of pathogen resistance in plants, genome
editing technologies have rapidly progressed and become most important genetic
tools (Borrelli et al. 2018). In this review, here we summarize how CRISPR/Cas9
technology plays a pivotal role to generate abiotic stress tolerant crops to boost
agricultural productivity.
2 RISPR/Cas9: A Remarkable Genome Modification Tool

C
in Plants
In recent years, genomic DNA had many independent studies reporting the repair
applications of the CRISPR/Cas9 system, a DNA repair system prone to congenital
errors that is ideal for mutation. Known for the remarkable adaptive immune system
based on nucleic acid bacteria or archaea, the researchers re-initiated the CRISPR/
Cas9 system into molecular technology to create double stranded breaks (DSBs) in
specific genomic sites to facilitate site-specific genome editing (Schiml and Puchta
2016; Schwank et al. 2013). The creation of a unique RNA (sgRNA) guide, which is
able to correctly address Cas9 at the predetermined site in the host genome, was the
most innovative review. Therefore, the CRISPR/Cas9 system has been reduced not
only by three or two component numbers, but has also been able to design modular
or vector DNA expression for a possible simple and high-throughput selection of
DNA sites in genomes in all organisms, including humans, animals, and plants.
In making such a modular DNA expression, the synthesis of oligonucleotides
from targeting sites was necessary for a new orientation and, originally, they were
required to be assembled in modular form for the cRNA spacer. This technical
CRISPR/Cas9: A New Revolutionary Science in Agricultural and Horticulture 197
simplicity represents a significant reduction of the essential resources needed to

create the previous genome modification tools, such as TALEN to indicate a new
site because TALEN works in pairs and each TALEN compilation should synthe-
size the 2000 bp DNA fragment for mounting. This system has been tested on many
plant species, including Arabidopsis, rice, sorghum, tobacco, and wheat. It is
unique in terms of hardness and degree during the adoption of the CRISPR/Cas9
system in the plants because in August 2012 this system was demonstrated in bac-
teria (Shalem et al. 2014; Shan et al. 2014).
3 RISPR/Cas9: An Innovative Genome Editing Tool

C
to Enhance Production Yield
CRISPR/Cas9 technology was first reported in 2012 and since then thousands of
research papers have been published (Adli 2018). Together with its applicability as
a fundamental biological research tool in research laboratories, the CRISPR/Cas9
system has been prepared for its wide range of potential applications in the “real
world.” For example, many are interested in the possible applications of CRISPR/
Cas9, in solving some of the challenges of genetic engineering such as the creation
of bacteria that can break down hard plant material (e.g., lignin) in the production
of biofuels (Roy et al. 2018). Increasingly, the potential applications of CRISPR/
Cas9 for agricultural problems are presented in the context of crop improvement in
particular, such as stress or disease tolerance and the most productive varieties, but
in relation to livestock engineering (Yan and Fong 2017) (Fig. 1). The performance
in the form of genome editing tool in Arabidopsis and Tobacco -CRISPR has been
road-testing, in other crops including wheat, rice, soya bean, potato, sorbet, orange,
and tomatoes has been done. By the end of 2014, scientists focus on the develop-
ment of abiotic stress tolerant plants using CRISPR/Cas9 technology (Arora and
Narula 2017). The potential application of CRISPR-Cas9 raises questions for the
improvement of crops or animals: “does CRISPR-Cas9 have a role in food secu-
rity?” The answer is far from simple, because it depends on a wide range of factors
in the food system (Table 1). This innovative tool provides us the ways to achieve
sustainability in the food sector to feed nine billion mouths by 2050 by incorporat-
ing value-added genes. The efficiency of CRISPR/Cas9 is due to its precise, fast,
and specificity in nature. In some genes specific genomic sites were targeted with
this system and the desired site-specific mutation rate was significantly higher.
Transient expression of the CRISPR/Cas9 system in protoplasts (plant cells with-
out cell wall) or tissue, recorded mutagenesis rate of 11.1% (Arabidopsis proto-
plast) up to 90.1% (rice immature embryo) (Lin et al. 2018). In cases of steady
expression of systems in revived plants, the mutation rate was also higher, which
was different from 4.0% to 91.6%. The highest mutation rate of 91.6% of the reju-
venated rice plants was observed in which the Lazy 1 gene was targeted (Viana
et al. 2019). It has been demonstrated that the Lazy 1 gene of rice has an important
Fig. 1 Schematic representation of the application of CRISPR/Cas9 genome editing tool in

agriculture
role in determining rice lazy angle and inhibit laziness, which results in plants
spreading wide. Interestingly, in a recent report, it has been demonstrated that
TAC1 gene that regulates the growth of pillow in peach is related to Lazy1. It is
possible that by targeting the apple equivalent of TAC1 or Lazy1 gene, there can be
a large angle of branches in the apple, which is an ideal and preferred tree form in
the current orchard system (Smith et al. 2006).
4 CRISPR/Cas9 Achievements in Plants
The CRISPR/Cas system generates stable and inherited mutations, which can be
easily separated from the Cas9/sgRNA construct to avoid further modifications by
CRISPR/Cas. As a result, only one generation of homogenizing modified transgenic-
free plants is developed. Transgenic rice has been successfully developed with the
mutation of the desired gene by separating the transgenes with self-pollination in
the T1 generation (Brooks et al. 2014; Fauser et al. 2014; Feng et al. 2014; Gao and
Zhao 2014; Jiang et al. 2014; Schiml et al. 2014; Zhang et al. 2014; Zhou et al.
2014). Xu et al. (2015) reported that relative cleavage efficacy of Cas9 nucleases is
better than before: TALEN and ZFN against the same target sites (Gaj et al. 2013;
Table 1 Application of genome editing tools in different plant species to improve yield, biotic and
abiotic stress resistance, and nutritional quality (Sedeek et al. 2019)
Targeted
Target trait Plant species sequence(s) Result Method Reference
Yield Oryza sativa GS3, Gn 1a Grain size and CRISPR/ Shen et al.
no. increases Cas9 (2018)
O. sativa GW2, GW5, Grain weight CRISPR/ Xu et al. (2016)
TGW6 increases Cas9
O. sativa Gn1a, DEP1, Grain size and CRISPR/ Li et al.
GS3 number increase Cas9 (2016a, b)
and dense, erect
panicles
Virus Arabidopsis eIF (iso) 4E Potyvirus CRISPR/ Pyott et al.
resistance thaliana resistance Cas9 (2016)
A. thaliana BSCTV Beet severe CRISPR/ Ji et al. (2015)
genome curly top virus Cas9
resistance
Cucumis eIF4E1 Cucumber vein CRISPR/ Chandrasekaran
sativus yellowing virus, Cas9 et al. (2016)
zucchini yellow
mosaic virus,
and papaya ring
spot mosaic
virus-W
Nicotiana BSCTV Beet severe CRISPR/ Ji et al. (2015)
benthamiana genome curly top virus Cas9
resistance
N. benthamiana TYLCV Tomato yellow CRISPR/ Ali et al. 2015
genome leaf curl virus Cas9
resistance
N. benthamiana AGO2 Virus resistance
CRISPR/ Ludman et al.
Cas9 (2017)
Fungus Oryza sativa OsERF922 Rice blast CRISPR/ Wang et al.
resistance resistance Cas9 (2016)
Solanum SlMlo Powdery mildew CRISPR/ Nekrasov et al.
lycopersicum resistance Cas9 (2017)
Triticum TaMLO-A1 Powdery mildew CRISPR/ Wang et al.
aestivum resistance Cas9 (2014)
TALE
Bacterial Citrus sinensis CsLOB1 Canker CRISPR/ Peng et al.
resistance resistance Cas9 (2017)
Oryza sativa OsSWEET13 Bacterial blight CRISPR/ Zhou et al.
resistance Cas9 (2015)
O. sativa Os11N3 Bacterial blight TALEN Li et al. (2012)
(OsSWEET14) resistance
(continued)
Table 1 (continued)
Targeted
Target trait Plant species sequence(s) Result Method Reference
Drought Arabidopsis mir169a Improved CRISPR/ Zhao et al.
resistance drought Cas9 (2016)
tolerance
Zea mays ARGOS8 Improved grain CRISPR/ Shi et al. (2017)
yield under field Cas9
drought stress
conditions
Salt tolerance Oryza sativa OsRAV2 Salt stress CRISPR/ Duan et al.
tolerance Cas9 (2016)
Herbicide Linum EPSPS Glyphosate CRISPR/ Sauer et al.
tolerance usitatissimum tolerance Cas9 (2016)
Nicotiana MEL1 Herbicide ZFN Cai et al. (2009)
tabacum tolerance
Nicotiana ALS Resistance to TALEN Zhang et al.
tabacum imidazolinone (2013)
and sulfonylurea
herbicide
Oryza sativa ALS Chlorsulfuron CRISPR/
and bispyribac Cas9
sodium tolerance
Oryza sativa EPSPS Glyphosate CRISPR/ Li et al. (2016a,
tolerance Cas9 b)
Solanum ALS1 Chlorsulfuron CRISPR/ Butler et al.
tuberosum and bispyribac Cas9 (2016)
sodium tolerance
Zea mays IPK1 Herbicide ZFN Shukla et al.
tolerance (2009)
Nutritional Camelina FAD2 Increase seed oil CRISPR/ Jiang et al.
improvement sativa content Cas9 (2017)
Oryza sativa SBEI, SBEIIb High amylose CRISPR/ Sun et al.
content Cas9 (2017)
O. sativa OsBADH22 Increase TALEN Shan et al.
fragrance (2015)
content
Solanum GBSS High CRISPR/ Andersson et al.
tuberosum amylopectin Cas9 (2017)
Zea mays ZmIPK Reduce phytic CRISPR/ Liang et al.
acid content Cas9 (2014)
TALEN
Johnson et al. 2015). Xing et al. (2014) developed a toolkit for modifying multiplex
genomes in plants using the set of binary vectors based on CRISPR/Cas9 and a
series of vectors of gRNA modules. This will facilitate the transient or constant
expression of CRISPR/Cas9 in various types of plant systems and is particularly
useful for the modification of high-efficiency multiplex plant genomes (Xing et al.
2014). Therefore, the only requirement for genetic modification methods is the pro-
vision of only two components of the host cell, i.e., the supply of Cas9 and sgRNA,
the genomes of plants. Baltes et al. (2014) suggested that replication of the Gemini
virus (GVR) can be used to administer plants with improved mutations to deliver
Cas9/sgRNA when the replication protein gene co-formation has been transformed
(REP) with the gene or the sgRNA. The rapid progress in the development of
CRISPR/Cas9 in a series of tools for the study of cellular and molecular biology is
remarkable, thanks to the simplicity of the system, its high efficiency, and versatil-
ity. In the nuclear design system, currently available for accurate genomic engineer-
ing, the CRISPR/Cas9 system is the easiest to use. It is now also clear that the
probability that Cas9 reaches DNA beyond the rupture and its genome for the spe-
cific recruitment of proteins, its usefulness will be limited only by our imagination.
5 Future Prospects
Possible future crops for sustainable productive agriculture through genome editing
are those that have better resistance to harmful insects, with greater nutritional value
and which can survive in a changing climate. Climate-resistant agriculture to com-
bat biotic and abiotic stress is the future of crop improvement by modifying the
genome for manipulation mediated by direct mutagenesis and the study of tran-
scriptional control by dissection of physiological and molecular interferences under
combined stress (Kissoudis et al. 2014; Jain 2015). The genome assembly has
played a very important role in the development of new bioenergy crops, which
could give maximum performance in the different conditions and climate changes
(Bosch and Hazen 2013). This technology could offer any new concept of genome
modification for plants in order to improve crops for better nutrition and food safety.
Furthermore, methods of direct administration of Cas9 and gRNA using
Agrobacterium and viral replicons through the use of nanoparticles can be very use-
ful for simplifying genome modification technology. (Hiei et al. 2014; Khatodia
et al. 2014; Nonaka and Ezura 2014). The Cas9 inducible system for transcription
modulation such as the Cas9 and chemically inducible system and the activated
light Cas9 effector (LACE) could be used to improve culture in the future (Polstein
and Gersbach 2015; Zetsche et al. 2015). The generation of large-scale, genome-
wide sgRNA libraries for high-speed function loss detection applications based on
the CRISPRi system such as the RNAi system is particularly feasible for model
plants in the future (Heintze et al. 2013).
6 Conclusion
The CRISPR/Cas9 system was recently developed by reprogramming the immune

system based on bacterial type II nucleic acids, a new site-specific genome modi-
fication tool. Given its remarkable technological simplicity, the CRISPR/Cas9
system is becoming the main choice technique that replaces the central role of
TALEN-based biotechnology in site-specific genome editing. Crops produced
through the Cas9-RNP genome/technology edition will certainly improve the pre-
cision farming approach to obtain useful traits and minimize the obstacle to dereg-
ulation for sustainable agriculture. The CRISPR/Cas9 system quickly adapted to
both the model and the cultivated plants and was established with a desirable effi-
ciency in the selection of genes for specific sites. It is likely that this system will
become more efficient over time, allowing high-throughput applications that will
direct the entire genome into plants. Ultimately, the wave of shock sent today to
the community of genome engineers by the discoverers of this brainstorming
genome modification technique will be perceived by agriculture in a positive way
tomorrow.
References
Adli M (2018) The CRISPR tool kit for genome editing and beyond. Nat Commun 9:1911
Ali Z, Abulfaraj A, Idris A, Ali S, Tashkandi M, Mahfouz MM (2015) CRISPR/Cas9-mediated
viral interference in plants. Genome Biol 16:238
Andersson M, Turesson H, Nicolia A, Fält AS, Samuelsson M, Hofvander P (2017) Efficient tar-
geted multiallelic mutagenesis in tetraploid potato (Solanum tuberosum) by transient CRISPR-
Cas9 expression in protoplasts. Plant Cell Rep 36:117–128
Arora L, Narula A (2017) Gene editing and crop improvement using CRISPR-Cas9 system. Front
Plant Sci 8:1932
Baltes NJ, Gil-Humanes J, Cermak T, Atkins PA, Voytas DF (2014) DNA replicons for plant
genome engineering. Plant Cell 26:151–163
Bawa AS, Anilakumar KR (2012) Genetically modified foods: safety, risks and public concerns—a
review. J Food Sci Technol 50(6):1035–1046
Borrelli VM, Brambilla V, Rogowsky P, Marocco A, Lanubile A (2018) The enhancement of plant
disease resistance using CRISPR/Cas9 technology. Front Plant Sci 9:1245
Bosch M, Hazen SP (2013) Lignocellulosic feed stocks: research progress and challenges in opti-
mizing biomass quality and yield. Front Plant Sci 4:474
Brooks C, Nekrasov V, Lippman Z, Van Eck J (2014) Efficient gene editing in tomato in the first
generation using the CRISPR/Cas9 system. Plant Physiol 166:1292–1297
Butler NM, Baltes NJ, Voytas DF, Douches DS (2016) Gemini virus mediated genome editing
in potato (Solanum tuberosum L.) using sequence specific nucleases. Front Plant Sci 7:1045
Cai CQ, Doyon Y, Ainley WM, Miller JC, Dekelver RC, Moehle EA et al (2009) Targeted trans-
gene integration in plant cells using designed zinc finger nucleases. Plant Mol Biol 69:699–709
Chandrasekaran J, Brumin M, Wolf D, Leibman D, Klap C, Pearlsman M et al (2016) Development
of broad virus resistance in non-transgenic cucumber using CRISPR/Cas9 technology. Mol
Plant Pathol 17:1140–1153
Duan YB, Li J, Qin RY, Xu RF, Li H, Yang YC et al (2016) Identification of a regulatory element
responsible for salt induction of rice OSRAV2 through ex situ and in situ promoter analysis.
Plant Mol Biol 90:49–62
Fauser F, Schiml S, Puchta H (2014) Both CRISPR/Cas-based nucleases and nickases can be used
efficiently for genome engineering in Arabidopsis thaliana. Plant J 79:348–359
Feng Z, Mao Y, Xu N, Zhang B, Wei P, Yang DL (2014) Multigeneration analysis reveals the inher-
itance, specificity, and patterns of CRISPR/Cas-induced gene modifications in Arabidopsis.
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 111:4632–4637
Gaj T, Gersbach CA, Barbas CF (2013) ZFN, TALEN, and CRISPR/Cas-based methods for
genome engineering. Trends Biotechnol 31:397–405
Gao Y, Zhao Y (2014) Self-processing of ribozyme-flanked RNAs into guide RNAs in vitro and
in vivo for CRISPR-mediated genome editing. J Integr Plant Biol 56:343–349
Heintze J, Luft C, Ketteler R (2013) A CRISPR/Cas for high-throughput silencing. Front Genet
4:193
Hiei Y, Ishida Y, Komari T (2014) Progress of cereal transformation technology mediated by
Agrobacterium tumefaciens. Front Plant Sci 5:628
Jain M (2015) Function genomics of abiotic stress tolerance in plants: a CRISPR approach. Front
Plant Sci 6:375
Ji X, Zhang H, Zhang Y, Wang Y, Gao C (2015) Establishing a CRISPR/Cas- like immune system
conferring DNA virus resistance in plants. Nat Plants 1:15144
Jiang W, Yang B, Weeks DP (2014) Efficient CRISPR/Cas9-mediated gene editing in Arabidopsis
thaliana and inheritance of modified genes in the T2 and T3 generations. PLoS One 9:e99225
Jiang WZ, Henry IM, Lynagh PG, Comai L, Cahoon EB, Weeks DP (2017) Significant enhance-
ment of fatty acid composition in seeds of the allohexaploid, Camelina sativa, using CRISPR/
Cas9 gene editing. Plant Biotechnol J 15:648–657
Johnson RA, Gurevich V, Filler S, Samach A, Levy A (2015) Comparative assessments of CRISPR-
Cas nucleases’ cleavage efficiency in planta. Plant Mol Biol 87:143–156
Khatodia S, Kharb P, Batra P, Chowdhury VK (2014) Development and characterization of trans-
genic chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) plants with cry1Ac gene using tissue culture independent
protocol. Int J Adv Res 2:323–331
Kissoudis C, van de Wiel C, Visser RGF, van der Linden G (2014) Enhancing crop resilience to
combined abiotic and biotic stress through the dissection of physiological and molecular cross-
talk. Front Plant Sci 5:207
Li T, Liu B, Spalding MH, Weeks DP, Yang B (2012) High-efficiency TALEN-based gene editing
produces disease-resistant rice. Nat Biotechnol 30:390
Li M, Li X, Zhou Z, Wu P, Fang M, Pan X et al (2016a) Reassessment of the four yield-related
genes Gn1a, DEP1, GS3, and IPA1 in rice using a CRISPR/Cas9 system. Front Plant Sci 7:377
Li J, Meng X, Zong Y, Chen K, Zhang H, Liu J et al (2016b) Gene replacements and insertions in
rice by intron targeting using CRISPR–Cas9. Nat Plants 2:16139
Liang Z, Zhang K, Chen K, Gao C (2014) Targeted mutagenesis in Zea mays using TALENS and
the CRISPR/Cas system. J Genet Genomics 41:63–68
Lin CS, Hsu CT, Yang LH, Lee LY, Fu JY, Cheng QW, Wu FH, Hsiao HCW, Zhang Y, Chang WJ,
Yu CT, Wang W, Liao LJ, Gelvin SB, Shih MC (2018) Application of protoplast technology to
CRISPR/Cas9 mutagenesis: from single-cell mutation detection to mutant plant regeneration.
Plant Biotechnol J 16(7):1295–1310
Ludman M, Burgyán J, Fátyol K (2017) Crispr/Cas9 mediated inactivation of argonaute 2 reveals
its differential involvement in antiviral responses. Sci Rep 7:1010
Nekrasov V, Wang C, Win J, Lanz C, Weigel D, Kamoun S (2017) Rapid generation of a transgene-
free powdery mildew resistant tomato by genome deletion. Sci Rep 7:482
Nonaka S, Ezura H (2014) Plant-Agrobacterium interaction mediated by ethylene and super-
Agrobacterium conferring efficient gene transfer. Front Plant Sci 5:681
Pandey P, Irulappan V, Bagavathiannan MV, Senthil-Kumar M (2017) Impact of combined abiotic
and biotic stresses on plant growth and avenues for crop improvement by exploiting physio-
morphological traits. Front Plant Sci 8:537
Peng A, Shanchun C, Tiangang L, Lanzhen X, Yongrui H, Liu W et al (2017) Engineering canker-
resistant plants through CRISPR/Cas9-targeted editing of the susceptibility gene CSLOB1 pro-
moter in citrus. Plant Biotechnol J 15:1509–1519
Polstein LR, Gersbach CA (2015) A light-inducible CRISPR-Cas9 system for control of endog-
enous gene activation. Nat Chem Biol 11:198–200
Pyott DE, Emma S, Attila M (2016) Engineering of CRISPR/Cas9-mediated potyvirus resistance
in transgene-free Arabidopsis plants. Mol Plant Pathol 17:1276–1288
Ronald P (2011) Plant genetics, sustainable agriculture and global food security. Genetics 188(1):
11–20
Roy B, Zhao J, Yang C, Luo W, Xiong T, Li Y, Fang X, Gao G, Singh CO, Madsen L, Zhou Y,
Kristiansen K (2018) CRISPR/Cascade 9-mediated genome editing-challenges and opportuni-
ties. Front Genet 9:240. https://doi.org/10.3389/fgene.2018.00240
Sauer NJ, Jerry M, Miller RB, Warburg ZJ, Walker KA, Beetham PR et al (2016) Oligonucleotide-
directed mutagenesis for precision gene editing. Plant Biotechnol J 14:496–502
Schiml S, Puchta H (2016) Revolutionizing plant biology: multiple ways of genome engineering
by CRISPR/Cas. Plant Methods 12:8
Schiml S, Fauser F, Puchta H (2014) The CRISPR/Cas system can be used as nuclease for in planta
gene targeting and as paired nickases for directed mutagenesis in Arabidopsis resulting in heri-
table progeny. Plant J 80:1139–1150
Schwank G, Koo BK, Sasselli V, Dekkers JF, Heo I (2013) Functional repair of CFTR by CRISPR/
Cas9 in intestinal stem cell organoids of cystic fibrosis patients. Cell Stem Cell 13:653–658
Sedeek KEM, Mahas A, Mahfouz M (2019) Plant genome engineering for targeted improvement
of crop traits. Front Plant Sci 10:114
Shalem O, Sanjana NE, Hartenian E, Shi X, Scott DA et al (2014) Genome-scale CRISPR-Cas9
knockout screening in human cells. Science 343:84–87
Shan Q, Wang Y, Li J, Gao C (2014) Genome editing in rice and wheat using the CRISPR/Cas
system. Nat Protoc 9:2395–2410
Shan Q, Zhang Y, Chen K, Zhang K, Gao C (2015) Creation of fragrant rice by targeted knockout
of the OSBADH2 gene using TALEN technology. Plant Biotechnol J 13:791–800
Shen L, Chun W, Yaping F, Junjie W, Qing L, Xiaoming Z et al (2018) QTL editing confers oppos-
ing yield performance in different rice varieties. J Integr Plant Biol 60:89–93
Shi J, Huirong G, Hongyu W, Renee LH, Archibald RL, Meizhu YM et al (2017) ARGOS8 vari-
ants generated by CRISPR-Cas9 improve maize grain yield under field drought stress condi-
tions. Plant Biotechnol J 15:207–216
Shukla VK, Doyon Y, Miller JC, Dekelver RC, Moehle EA, Worden SE et al (2009) Precise
genome modification in the crop species Zea mays using zinc-finger nucleases. Nature 459:437
Smith J, Grizot S, Arnould S, Duclert A, Epinat JC (2006) A combinatorial approach to create
artificial homing endonucleases cleaving chosen sequences. Nucleic Acids Res 34:e149
Sun Y, Jiao G, Liu Z, Zhang X, Li J, Guo X et al (2017) Generation of high-amylose rice through
CRISPR/Cas9-mediated targeted mutagenesis of starch branching enzymes. Front Plant Sci
8:298
Viana VE, Pegoraro C, Busanello C, Costa de Oliveira A (2019) Mutagenesis in rice: the basis for
breeding a new super plant. Front Plant Sci 10:1326
Wang F, Wang C, Liu P, Lei C, Hao W, Gao Y et al (2016) Enhanced rice blast resistance by
CRISPR/Cas9-targeted mutagenesis of the ERF transcription factor gene OsERF922. PLoS
One 11:e0154027
Xing HL, Dong L, Wang ZP, Zhang HY, Han CY, Liu B (2014) A CRISPR/Cas9 toolkit for multi-
plex genome editing in plants. BMC Plant Biol 14:327
Xu RF, Li H, Qin RY, Li J, Qiu CH, Yang YC (2015) Generation of inheritable and “transgene
clean” targeted genome-modified rice in later generations using the CRISPR/Cas9 system. Sci
Rep 5:11491
Xu R, Yang Y, Qin R, Li H, Qiu C, Li L et al (2016) Rapid improvement of grain weight via
highly efficient CRISPR/Cas9-mediated multiplex genome editing in rice. J Genet Genomics
43:529–532
Yan Q, Fong SS (2017) Challenges and advances for genetic engineering of non-model Bacteria
and uses in consolidated bioprocessing. Front Microbiol 8:2060
Zetsche B, Volz SE, Zhang F (2015) A split-Cas9 architecture for inducible genome editing and
transcription modulation. Nat Biotechnol 33:139–142
Zhang Y, Zhang F, Li X, Baller JA, Qi Y, Starker CG et al (2013) Transcription activator-like effec-
tor nucleases enable efficient plant genome engineering. Plant Physiol 161:20–27
Zhang H, Zhang J, Wei P, Zhang B, Gou F, Feng Z (2014) The CRISPR/Cas9 system produces
specific and homozygous targeted gene editing in rice in one generation. Plant Biotechnol J
12:797–807
Zhao Y, Zhang C, Liu W, Gao W, Liu C, Song G et al (2016) An alternative strategy for targeted
gene replacement in plants using a dual-sgRNA/Cas9 design. Sci Rep 6:23890
Zhou J, Wang J, Shen B et al (2014) Dual sgRNAs facilitate CRISPR/Cas9-mediated mouse
genome targeting. FEBS J 281:1717–1725
Zhou J, Peng Z, Long J, Sosso D, Liu B, Eom JS et al (2015) Gene targeting by the TAL effector
PthXo2 reveals cryptic resistance gene for bacterial blight of rice. Plant J 82:632–643
Pros and Cons of Nanotechnology
Waseem Mushtaq, Adnan Shakeel, Mohammad Afaan Fazili,

Ishani Chakrabartty, and Mustafa Sevindik
1 Introduction
Global food demand is rising at an alarming rate as the human population is increas-
ing exponentially and may hit a record of nine billion by 2050. To combat this
problem of food demand various strategies are being implemented to increase the
productivity of crops and protect them from agricultural pests. The increased popu-
lation rate forces agricultural society to find new ways of improved crop productiv-
ity. The problem of poverty and malnutrition has become a deep concern for
countries across world. The progress in agriculture sector plays a critical role in
population growth and economic forums as it produces raw materials for food and
feed industry. With economic development, the soil nutrient balances are differed.
W. Mushtaq (*)
Allelopathy Laboratory, Department of Botany, Aligarh Muslim University,
A. Shakeel
Environmental and Pathology Section, Department of Botany, Aligarh Muslim University,
Aligarh, U.P., India
M. A. Fazili
Advanced Plant Physiology Section, Department of Botany, Aligarh Muslim University,
I. Chakrabartty
Department of Science, PAFGC, P.A. College of Engineering, Mangalore University,
Mangalore, India
M. Sevindik
Department of Food Processing, Bahçe Vocational School, Osmaniye Korkut Ata,
Osmaniye, Turkey

208 W. Mushtaq et al.
In developing countries, the soil fertility plays a significant role to assist economy
and agriculture (Campbell 2014). Present century holds a good demand for efficient,
reliable, and cost-effective systems for detecting, monitoring, and diagnosis of bio-
logical host molecules (Sagadevan and Periasamy 2014). The traditional farming
approaches are incapable of maintaining a pace at which food needs are required
and consequently we have to depend and imply the nanotechnology in agriculture
and its allied sectors. In modern agriculture, one cannot think of improving agricul-
tural productivity without the use of chemical fertilizers and pesticides; however,
most of the agrochemicals are not eco-friendly and are thus detrimental to human
health (Kah 2015). Nanotechnology is a novel technique for improved and sustain-
able agricultural production and also harbors a good capacity to bring novel altera-
tions in the agricultural systems. Nanotechnology introduces new technologies and
materials for use in molecular biology for the identification of plant pathogenic
microorganisms (Mousavi and Rezaei 2011). In agriculture, nanotechnology has the
potential to revolutionize this sector by introducing new techniques for disease
diagnosis, specific pathogen targeted treatment, and increasing the resistance of
plants to fight pests. It can also improve nutrient uptake by plants and can boost
plants to withstand ecological pressures. In developing countries, the soil fertility
plays a significant role to assist economy and agriculture (Campbell 2014). The
advantages of nanotechnology operated techniques for sustainable agriculture are
discussed below under the following headings.
2 anofertilizers: An Alternate to Conventional Chemical

N
Fertilizers
To enhance the crop yield production, fertilizers play a pivotal role in the agriculture
sector; however, most of the fertilizers applied are unavailable to plant due to vari-
ous factors. These include leaching, degradation of fertilizers by photolysis, hydro-
lysis, and decomposition. As a result of this, the soils and underground water
become polluted or face nutrient imbalance. This problem can be solved through the
use of nanofertilizers or nano-encapsulated nutrient. A nano-fertilizer can be defined
as a substance having dimensions in nanometers and is capable of delivering nutri-
ents to crops in an efficient manner. For instance, nanomaterial encapsulated in a
thin protective polymer film or in the form of particles or emulsions of nanoscale
dimensions (DeRosa et al. 2010). Nanofertilizers are expected to possess beneficial
properties to crops which include sustained release of fertilizers to regulate plant
growth and development with an enhanced target activity (Ghormade et al. 2011).
For the effective release of nitrogen fertilizers, urea-fertilized zeolite chips were
used (Millán et al. 2008). The solubilization of phosphate minerals has been reported
to be improved through ammonium-charged zeolites. This results in enhanced phos-
phate uptake by plants which ultimately improve the yield of crops. Urea-modified
hydroxyapatite nanoparticles encapsulated within softwood of Gliricidia sepium
have been reported to regulate the sustained release of nitrogen fertilizers into soil
(Kottegoda et al. 2011). The conventional fertilizers have nutrient use efficiencies of
Pros and Cons of Nanotechnology 209
Table 1 Comparison of nanofertilizers and conventional fertilizers (Cui et al. 2010)

S. No. Properties Nanotechnology fertilizers Conventional fertilizers
1 Solubility Micronutrients formulated through Less solubility due to
and nanotechnology may improve and macroscopic nature
dispersion increase bioavailability by reducing soil
absorption and fixation
2 Mode of Through encapsulation, nutrient release The excess release of
nutrient inclosing both rate and pattern can be fertilizers result in toxicity
release controlled for water soluble fertilizers and cause soil ecological
imbalance
3 Duration of They might extend the effective period of At the time of delivery they
nutrient nutrient supply of fertilizers into soil for are used by plants and rest
release plant use remains as insoluble salts in
soil
4 Uptake Because of nano-dimensions, it might It decreases efficiency and
efficiency improve nutrient uptake and efficiency of bulk amount is not available
fertilizers to plant roots
5 Rate of They reduce the loss of fertilizer nutrients They show high nutrient
nutrient loss into soil losses due to leaching, rain
off and drift
about 30–35%, 18–20%, and 35–40% for N, P, and K. However, nano-fertilizer has
the ability to enhance nutrient use efficiency by using the properties of nanoparticles
like increased surface area. Both physical and chemical approaches are used to
fortify nutrients singly or in combination onto the absorbents with nano-dimen-
sions. The nutrients are loaded on nanoparticles through different methods that
includes (a) by encapsulating the nutrient in nanoparticulate polymeric shell, (b) by
absorption on nanoparticles, (c) ligand mediated attachment to nanoparticle, and (d)
through synthesis of nanoparticles by nutrient itself. The anionic nutrients (NO3−,
PO42−, SO42) are surface modified before loading, while the cationic nutrients (NH4+,
K+, Ca2+, Mg2) are loaded as such. Corradini et al. (2010) studied the interaction of
chitosan nanoparticles suspensions comprising of N, P, and K fertilizers and their
stability and concluded their usefulness agricultural sectors. Mesoporous silica
nanoparticles (150 nm) have been reported to entrap urea. This study reported five
times improvement in release period of nitrogen than conventional fertilization
(Wanyika et al. 2012). Milani et al. (2012) compared the ZnO nanoparticles coated
on urea and monoammonium phosphate and found that the later showed faster dis-
solution rate. Table 1 presents a comparison between nanofertilizers and conven-
tional fertilizers.
3 Nano-biotechnology and Plant Protection
The use of conventional methods for the control of pathogens and parasites adversely
affects the environment and the farmer’s economy, as 90% of applied pesticides are
lost in the air or as runoff. Furthermore, the haphazard use of pesticides enhances
resistance to pathogens and parasites, reduces soil biodiversity and the rate of nitro-
gen fixation, and facilitates bioaccumulation of pesticides (Ghormade et al. 2011;
Tilman et al. 2002). To mitigate the loss of pesticide and its hazardous effects,
nanoparticles or nano-capsules play a significant role due to their ability to control
release of active compound. This also equips agricultural scientists to mitigate envi-
ronmental pollution by production of eco-friendly pesticides. The nanoscale deliv-
ery system with active compound (pesticides and/or herbicides) can only be applied
when necessary in the field (Gruere et al. 2011). It can also produce nanocrystals to
augment the pesticide efficiency that decreases the dose of insecticides. In near
future, the application of nanoparticles for the smart delivery of active components
will be an attractive subject for treating all the pathological sufferings of plants
(Mousavi and Rezaei 2011). Nano-biotechnology has produced innovative means to
identify the pathogen and control the disease. Besides, nanosensors can be used to
detect the plant pathogen and pesticide (Fig. 1). The formulation of biopesticides
with nanomaterial and delivery of insecticides through encapsulation in nano-
materials for controlled release are the expected applications of nano-biotechnology
in plant protection (Debnath et al. 2012). Generally large volume of enzymes is
required in the biocontrol of plant diseases that becomes costly but application of
nano-biosensors cuts down the cost by immobilizing the enzyme/inhibitor on a
nanostructure which uses low volume of enzyme (Kim et al. 2006). Nowadays
almost all the pathogens can be identified and typed through various methods.
However, methods based on traditional culture are laborious and time consuming
Natural nanoclays
Remedication
Soil binding
Fertilizer delivery
Fig. 1 Use of nano-biotechnology in plant protection and nutrition (Ghormade et al. 2011)
(Fletcher et al. 2006) and those based on population of strains characterized in the
databases limit the identification using biochemical profiling. The antibody
specificity is required in more sensitive serological specific techniques such as
ELISA and indirect fluorescent antibody staining with immunofluorescence (Uddin
et al. 2003). The modern polymerase chain reaction based methods, such as RFLP
(restriction fragment length polymorphism), DNA fingerprinting, and amplification
of rRNA gene’s transcribed spacer region, increase the specificity of identification
but all these methods are very costly (van Doorn et al. 2007). The nanotechnology
based sensory systems for monitoring the environmental conditions and diagnostic
system for protection may allow farmers to minimize the use of agrochemicals with
an increased productivity (Ghormade et al. 2011). The development of silica-based
nano-biosensors (60 nm) is a novel microbial technology and it is a very sensitive
technique to detect a single bacterial cell (Zhao et al. 2004).
Recent literature supported the efficacy of metal nanoparticles against a wide
range of plant pathogens and pests. Hence, nanoparticles could be employed in the
new formulations of insect repellents and pesticides preparation (Owolade et al.
2008; Gajbhiye et al. 2009; Goswami et al. 2010). The pesticides which can be eas-
ily prepared and employed include polymeric nanoparticles such as iron oxide
nanoparticles and gold nanoparticles (Sharon et al. 2010). Several insecticides, such
as imidacloprid, carbofuran, and thiram, have been formulated through polyethyl-
ene glycol (PEG) to control the release of active compound (Adak et al. 2012;
Pankaj et al. 2012; Kaushik et al. 2013) as PEG was noted to be required for the
release of insecticide. The release of β-cyfluthrin improved through nanoformula-
tion from 4 to 5 days under commercial formulation to 20 days under nanoformula-
tion (Loha et al. 2011, 2012). In other study, a nanofiber network in which
thiamethoxam (50%) was loaded over lactic acid and cellulose nanocrystals against
white fly proved effective over a period of 9 days under greenhouse conditions
(Xiang et al. 2013).
4 Nano-biotechnology in Plant Growth and Yield Production
The smart delivery and detection system developed through nano-biotechnology

contribute to improved plant growth and agricultural productivity. The effect of
nanoparticles on plant growth depends on its concentration, composition, size,
chemical properties, and plant species (Ma et al. 2010). The use of nano-SiO2 in low
concentrations enhanced germination of tomato seeds (Siddiqui and Al-whaibi
2014). In maize the nano-SiO2 enhanced seed germination by improving nutrient
availability and correcting conductivity and pH of growth medium (Suriyaprabha
et al. 2012). The germination of squash seeds was enhanced along with the activa-
tion of antioxidant system under salt stress through nano-SiO2 (Siddiqui et al. 2015).
Nanoparticles of silica, palladium, gold, and copper have a significant impact on
seed germination of lettuce (Shah and Belozerova 2009). Not only germination but
also other growth parameters are improved by nano-SiO2. It enhances gas exchange
and photosynthetic parameters, such as stomatal conductance, transpiration rate,

potential activity of PSII, photochemical efficiency, photochemical quench, and
electron transport (Siddiqui et al. 2015). The zinc nanoparticles (ZnONPs) have also
been reported as beneficial for plant growth development. At lower concentrations,
it enhances seed germination in wheat and onion (Ramesh et al. 2014; Raskar and
Laware 2014). An enhancement in shoot and root growth, pigment and protein con-
tent, rhizospheric microbes, enzyme activity through ZnONPs was reported in
Cyamopsis tetragonoloba (Raliya and Tarafdar 2013). The supplementation of
MS-growth medium with ZnONPs enhanced the process of somatic embryogenesis,
regeneration of explant, and shooting. It also stimulates the proline synthesis and
antioxidant enzymes which result in improvement of plants to biotic stress (Helaly
et al. 2014). Similarly gold nanoparticles (AuNPs) also have beneficial effects on
plant growth and development (Kumari et al. 2009). Silver nanoparticles (AgNPs)
have been reported to enhance plant growth in Arabidopsis thaliana (Syu et al.
2014), Crocus sativus (Rezvani et al. 2012), Boswellia ovalifoliolata (Savithramma
et al. 2012), Brassica juncea (Salama 2012), beans and corn (Sharma et al.
2012, 2019).
5 Nano-biotechnology-Cost-Effective Approach
for Ecological Remediation
Environmental pollution is one of the most serious concerns that need an immediate
interest. Currently various organizations are working on the process of environmen-
tal remediation. Most of these programs are time consuming and costly. The use of
nanotechnology based techniques could provide a cost-effective solution to envi-
ronmental degradation. Nanoscale iron particles have some excellent properties for
in situ applications. These properties include large surface area, high surface reac-
tivity, and enormous flexibility. They are very effective in detoxification of various
ecological pollutants, like organochlorine pesticides, polychlorinated biphenyls
(PCBs), and chlorinated organic solvents. Recent studies have advocated that
nanoscale iron particles play a critical role in the transformation and detoxification
of a diversity of common ecological contaminants including chlorinated organic
solvents, organochlorine pesticides, and PCBs. Additionally the pace and effective-
ness of remediation can be improved by the use of catalyzed and supported iron
nanoparticles which represent the modified iron nanoparticle that has been synthe-
sized to improve the remediation process (Chinnamuthu and Boopathi 2009). The
use of nanoscale iron particles in ecological remediation has several advantages.
These are:
1. They can be used effectively for the transformation for a wide range of environ-
mental contaminants.
2. They are less expensive.
3. They are nontoxic.
The heavy metal pollution of soil and water causes harm to both terrestrial and
aquatic ecosystems. Use of “magnetic” bacteria could prove very effective for the
removal of heavy metals from aquatic systems. The occurrence of magnetic ions
like iron sulfide causes precipitation of heavy metal on bacterial cell wall. This
results in magnetization of bacteria for removal by magnetic separation process.
Chinnamuthu and Boopathi (2009) proposed a new way of synthesizing meso
porous magnetic nanocomposite particles for the remediation of environmental
pollutants. This method employs molecular templates to coat nanoparticles of
magnetite with mesoporous silica. The development of a biodegradable and
quick-setting organic mulch technique based on soil binder by a US based com-
pany is a good example. This technique caused the silicates of soil and product to
self-assemble into a layer that remained for longer durations. This layer was
reported to retain soil water that enhanced the seeds blended in product to ger
minate. In Mexico it was claimed to prevent soil erosion that resulted from
forest fires.
6 esticide Degradation and Detoxification of Herbicide

P
Residues
The extreme use of pesticides and herbicides in crop protection causes harmful
contamination to ecosystem. Various conventional methods for treatment of con-
taminated soil and water have been developed. These methods include incineration,
phytoremediation, and photochemical methods. More innovative methods include
advanced oxidation methods and ultrasound-promoted remediation (Farre et al.
2007). The use of nanoparticles in remediation provides an innovative and promis-
ing approach (Joo and Cheng 2006). Various common pesticides like atrazine,
molinate, and chlorpyrifos can be degraded through nanoionized ZVI. The use of
LbL (Layer-by-layer) nano-engineering for direct surface modification for colloidal
substances is a novel approach. It involves the electrostatic interactions of oppo-
sitely charged electrolytes through a sequential adsorption process (Sasson et al.
2007). The excessive and continuous application of herbicide cause harm to suc-
ceeding crops. It can also lead to evolution of weed species with more resistance to
herbicides and may cause a change in weed flora. The residual problem of atrazine,
a globally used herbicide for broadleaved weeds, has limited its widespread use.
Nanotechnology provides a reliable solution to the residual problem of atrazine
through the application of modified silver NPs. AgNPs were modified through sta-
bilization of magnetite nanoparticles with carboxymethyl cellulose (CMC). The
residue atrazine was degraded by 88% through modified silver particles (Susha and
Chinnamuthu 2012).
7 How Nanoparticles Interact with Plants?
As already mentioned, the shape, dimensions, molecular structure, stability, and

functionalization of nanoparticles (NP) influence absorption, translocation, and
accumulation; it has also been found that the properties are influenced in a variable
way by the type of plant species and the site that facilitates the internalization of
NP. The plant cell wall acts as the primary site of interaction with the external
environment, which restricts entry to all foreign particles, including NPs.
Functionalized active sites among components of the plant cell wall include the
functional groups carboxylate, phosphate, hydroxyl, amine, sulfhydryl, and imid-
azole (Vinopal et al. 2007) which fit together to form complex biomolecules such
as cellulose, carbohydrates, and proteins (Knox 1995) and facilitate selective
absorption of NP. Absorption and differential or selective NP of cell wall translo-
cation is due to its semipermeable property that allows small particles to move
through them and shift the larger particles and limit their entry into the plant sys-
tem. Thus, the pore size of the cell wall with a diameter varying in the range of
5–20 nm gives the plant a screening property and is based exclusively on NP
uptake (Fleischer et al. 1999). Therefore, NPs with a comparable diameter as that
of the pore size of the cell wall can penetrate through them and reach the plasma
membrane. Navarro et al. (2008) also observed the formation of new pores in the
cell wall during reproduction or expansion of existing pores under the influence of
NP, which subsequently determines the most permeable cell wall and improves the
absorption of nanoparticles (Ovečka et al. 2005). After penetration inside the cell
wall, endocytosis mediated internalization of NPs occurs in which NPs are sur-
rounded by the plasma membrane as a structure similar to a cavity. Another route
of transport includes the complex formation of NP with root exudates or mem-
brane transporters (Kurepa et al. 2010). Hall and Williams (2003) have identified a
variety of ion transporters for various NP families. After their entry into the cells,
the NPs follow an apoplastic or symplastic transport mode. In the cytoplasm, NPs
interact and can bind a different organelle in different ways to interact more with
the plant metabolism both in positive and negative (Jia et al. 2005). When NP is
amnestied on leaf surfaces in various tissues filtered through openings or bases of
static trichomes (Uzu et al. 2010), stomatal openings in the photosynthetic areas
are obstructed because the accumulation of NP, the latter is heating leaf surface,
cause alterations of gaseous exchanges and further modifies the cellular and physi-
ological functions of plants (Da Silva et al. 2006). Ao et al. (2013) reported new
conjugated nanospheres derived from 1-naphthylacético (NNA), 3-aminopropyl-
triethoxysilane (APTES), and tetraethyl orthosilicate as a controlled release nano-
dimensions (CRF) formulation for plant growth. However, the exact mechanisms
of selective uptake of NP by different plant species are unknown and should be
explored.
8 Phytotoxicity of Nanoparticles: An Agricultural

Perspective
Yang and Watts (2005) studied the effect of nanoscale uncoated and phenanth
rene-coated alumina on root growth in corn, cucumber, soybeans, cabbage, and car-
rot and advocated that the uncoated alumina particles in a concentration of 2 mg/L
inhibited all the growth parameters. This was the first report on the phytotoxicity of
nanoscale particles in relation to the coating and uncoating. Murashov (2006) is of
view that the phytotoxic effect may not be nanospecific but could also be attributed
to the dissolution of aluminum. With the rapid expansion of nanotechnology, there
is apprehension about their possible entry into the food chain and subsequent bioac-
cumulation of manufactured nanomaterial (Priester et al. 2012). The use of nanoma-
terial is not inherently risky, for instance, traditional foods harbor numerous
nanoscale materials including proteins in milk, fat globules in mayonnaise, carbo-
hydrates, DNA, etc. However, the use of some nanoscale materials designed in agri-
culture, water, and food may prove detrimental for human health and environment
(Gruere et al. 2011). Priester et al. (2012) documented that the exposure path for
plants is the absorption of nanomaterial from the soil. Plants are considered as
essential components of ecosystems and play a crucial role in the environment
through the absorption and bioaccumulation (Xingmao et al. 2010). The underlying
mechanism of bioaccumulation, bio-magnification, and biotransformation of
nanoparticles designed in food crops is yet under study. Moreover few nanoparticles
and plant species have been investigated to understand the accumulation phenome-
non followed availability of nanoparticles in food crops. The engineered nanopar-
ticles (ENP) are most common in the environment and are classified into one of the
following five groups: carbon nanoparticles, metal oxides, quantum dots, zero
valence metals, and nanopolymers. These ENPs interact closely with the surround-
ing environment and, consequently, the ENP will certainly interact with the plants
and such interactions will lead to their absorption and accumulation in the biomass
of the plant, which later on influence their fate and transport in the environment. For
a successful ENP-plant interaction the penetration of ENPs in to the cell walls and
plasma membranes of the epidermis of the roots and their subsequent entry in to the
vascular tissues (xylem) is of paramount importance. It is assumed that the smaller
ENP aggregates pass through porous network of polysaccharide fibrous network of
cell wall. The smaller ENP induces the synthesis of newer and large pores that
facilitate the internalization of large ENPs (Xingmao et al. 2010).
The phytotoxicity of five types of nanoparticles such as multi-wall carbon nano-
tubes, alumina, aluminum, zinc, and zinc oxide on germination percentage and
growth rate of root has been reported in several plants including radish, canola, rye,
lettuce, corn, and cucumber. The germination percentage of seed remain unaffected
except for inhibition of zinc on nanoscale (nano-Zn) in ryegrass and zinc oxide
(nano-ZnO) in maize at 2000 mg/L, a great variation was found in the inhibition of
root growth depending on the type of nanoparticles used and plant in question (Lin
and Xing 2007). The suspensions of 2000 mg/L of nano-Zn or nano-ZnO have
p ractically completed the elongation of the root of the tested plant species (Lin and
Xing 2007). It was estimated that the inhibitory concentrations (IC50) of 50% of
nano-Zn and nano-ZnO were close to 50 mg/L for the radish and about 20 mg/L for
rapeseed and ryegrass (Lin and Xing 2007). Inhibition occurred during the seed
incubation process instead of the seeds soaking phase. These results are significant
in terms of the use and disposal of designed nanoparticles (Lin and Xing 2007). On
the contrary, pods size and plant growth were reduced even at the low doses of nano-
cerium oxide in soybean plants. Furthermore, it is apparent that nano-cerium oxides
has entered into the root nodules and influence the process of nitrogen fixation.
Priester et al. (2012) further reported that increase in the level of nano-cerium oxide
in the soil, there was a progressive reduction in the nitrogen fixation process in soy-
beans. Furthermore, the nanomaterial produced may represent a greater risk for
humans and livestock if it enters the food chain in an unregulated way. Nevertheless,
it was also noticed that a very high concentration of nano-silica silver produced
some chemical lesions in the analyzed plants. Several hydroponically cultivated
plants are influenced by a large number of manufactured nano-materials (MNM),
raising concern about the long-term effects of these materials on food supply (Rico
et al. 2011). However, MNMs may not be bioavailable (i.e., accessible to organ-
isms) in the soil (Tong et al. 2007). Multi-walled carbon nanotubes (MWCNTs)
have been shown to be harmful to Arabidopsis T87 suspension cells when they dif-
fer as a function of dissolved agglomerates and fine agglomerates (obtained after
ultrasound) (Lin et al. 2009). The cultured cells represented a decrease in dry
weight, lower profitability, and lower chlorophyll content and superoxide dismutase
activity. The effects were more pronounced in the fine agglomerates than in the
loose ones. This was explained due to the characteristic of forming groups of plant
cells with surrounding cells. Large but loose agglomerates could not penetrate such
groups of cells, while small and thin agglomerates can easily be distributed into
groups of plants because of their small size and their interactions with proteins and
polysaccharides of the cell wall. These characteristics of NP could be responsible
for the toxic behavior of NPs. Lin et al. (2009) also suggested that the presence of
metallic impurities (residual metals used as catalysts for the synthesis of carbon
nanotubes, CNT) could be the cause of the toxicity of MWCNT (Table 2). The CNT
can be stabilized through the natural organic substance (NOM) according to its
hydrophobic behavior (Navarro et al. 2008). Absorption, translocation, and accu-
mulation of NOM-CNT were observed in rice plants (Lin et al. 2009), Fullerene
C70-NOM-NOM or MWCNT with reduced hydrophobicity were studied in rice
plants at different concentrations. This may have occurred through osmotic pressure
and capillary action at the tip of the root of the plant, and the NP could penetrate
through the pores of the cell wall and were transferred through the plasmodesmata.
The presence of NP near the vascular bundle could interfere with the absorption of
water and nutrients from plants, which has a secondary effect on plant growth.
Epigenetic modifications through deacetylation of global histones were also induced
by the treatment of single-walled carbon nanotubes (SWCNT) in the roots of Zea
mays L., which translates into changes in gene expression and, consequently, influ-
ences growth and root development (Yan et al. 2013).
Table 2 Negative effects of NPs in routinely used food crops since 2009
Nanoparticles Size of
Crop (NPs) NPs (nm) Effects on growth References
Oryza sativa Single-walled 1.19 722 Lin et al.
carbon (major) 18, Delayed flowering, (2009)
nanotubes 722 decreased yield
Cucurbita pepo Multi-walled Diameter Reduced biomass Stampoulis
carbon range (38%) et al. (2009)
nanotubes 10–30
Zea mays TiO2/inorganic 30/1–60 Inhibited hydraulic Asli and
bentonite clay conductivity, leaf Neumann
growth, and (2009)
transpiration
Cucurbita pepo Ag 100 Inhibited transpiration Stampoulis
et al. (2009)
Allium cepa Ag <100 Mitotic abnormalities Kumari et al.
(2009)
Cucurbita pepo Cu 50 Biomass reduced to Stampoulis
90% et al. (2009)
Zea mays, Solanum CeO2 7 Germination reduced Lopez-
lycopersicum, Glycine Moreno et al.
max, Cucumis sativus (2010)
Glycine max ZnO 8 Inhibited radicle Lopez-
growth Moreno et al.
(2010)
Lycopersicum NiO ~23 Induced oxidative Faisal et al.
esculentum stress and necrosis (2013)
Phaseolus vulgaris CeO2 ~8 Induced oxidative Majumdar
stress et al. (2014)
Allium cepa Al2O3 Not Induced oxidative Rajeshwari
specified stress in root et al. (2015)
Cucurbita pepo Nd2O3 and bulk 30–45 Induced oxidative Chen et al.
stress and inhibition of (2016)
uptake of minerals by
roots.
Lactuca sativa CeO2 16.5 Induced oxidative Zhang et al.
stress (2017)
9 Conclusion and Future Perspectives
Despite the progress of NP in the field of nanotechnological applications that reach

the state of the art, its implications in agriculture and crop improvement are still in
an elementary phase. In order to exploit the promised benefits of NPs, it has become
essential to improve our understanding of plant-NP interactions through their char-
acterization and related phytotoxic aspects. Another important problem that needs
to be addressed is how to delineate the modes of absorption and translocation of NP
from plants. However, several routes have been proposed and the results have been
diverted based on growth conditions, plant species, and the size and concentration
of NPs. Therefore, it is important to explore the absorption kinetics of NPs under the
influence of particle size, agglomeration, and compositions. Its translocation, accu-
mulation, and biotransformation in different parts of the plant are another approach
to consider. Accumulated evidence suggests the toxic effects of NPs; however, the
results were modulated to produce positive effects through the modification of the
NP surface. It has been reported that NPs in different concentrations possess both
positive as well as negative effects on different plant species. This function could be
used simultaneously to promote the growth of edible crops and eliminate weeds or
phyto-pathogens that affect crops. The size and concentrations of NP could be
optimized to produce such desirable effects. Also the assimilation of NP and its
subsequent accumulation in the food web represent an important concern. Therefore,
one should try to design experimental models that describe the interaction between
the plant and the animal and the effects studied at the individual atrophic level. The
plant-NP interactions modifies the gene and the protein profiles of plant cells, which
eventually lead to changes in biological pathways that produce changes in plant
growth and development. Therefore, it is necessary to conduct an experimentation
to generate information at the molecular level caused by the absorption and translo-
cation of NP.
Acknowledgments The authors are thankful to the Aligarh Muslim University, India, for provid-
ing facilities and UGC for providing financial assistance.
References
Adak T, Kumar J, Shakil NA, Walia S (2012) Development of controlled release formulations of
imidacloprid employing novel nano-ranged amphiphilic polymers. J Environ Sci Health Part
B 47(3):217–225
Ao M, Zhu Y, He S, Li D, Li P, Li J, Cao Y (2013) Preparation and characterization of
1-naphthylacetic acid–silica conjugated nanospheres for enhancement of controlled-release
performance. Nanotechnology 24(3):035601
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):577–584
Campbell JC (2014) How policies change: the Japanese government and the aging society.
Princeton University Press, Princeton
Chen G, Ma C, Mukherjee A, Musante C, Zhang J, White JC, Dhankher OP, Xing B (2016) Tannic
acid alleviates bulk and nanoparticle Nd2O3 toxicity in pumpkin: a physiological and molecu-
lar response. Nanotoxicology 10(9):1243–1253
96(1/6):17–31
Corradini E, De Moura MR, Mattoso LH (2010) A preliminary study of the incorporation of NPK
fertilizer into chitosan nanoparticles. eXPRESS Polymer Lett 4(8):509–515
formulation, perspectives, challenges and strategies. In: International conference on Nanoagri,
Sao Pedro, Brazil, pp. 28–33
Da Silva LC, Oliva MA, Azevedo AA, De Araújo JM (2006) Responses of Restinga plant species
to pollution from an iron pelletization factory. Water Air Soil Pollut 175(1-4):241–256
Debnath N, Das S, Patra P, Mitra S, Goswami A (2012) Toxicological evaluation of entomotoxic
silica nanoparticle. Toxicol Environ Chem 94(5):944–951
Nat Nanotechnol 5(2):91
Faisal M, Saquib Q, Alatar AA, Al-Khedhairy AA, Hegazy AK, Musarrat J (2013) Phytotoxic
hazards of NiO-nanoparticles in tomato: a study on mechanism of cell death. J Hazard Mater
250:318–332
Farre MJ, Franch MI, Ayllon JA, Peral J, Domenech X (2007) Biodegradability of treated aque-
ous solutions of bio-recalcitrant pesticides by means of photocatalytic ozonation. Desalination
211:22–23
Fleischer A, O’Neill MA, Ehwald R (1999) The pore size of non-graminaceous plant cell walls is
rapidly decreased by borate ester cross-linking of the pectic polysaccharide rhamnogalacturo-
nan II. Plant Physiol 121(3):829–838
Fletcher BL, McKnight TE, Melechko AV, Simpson ML, Doktycz MJ (2006) Biochemical func-
tionalization of vertically aligned carbon nanofibres. Nanotechnology 17(8):2032
Nanomed Nanotechnol Biol Med 5(4):382–386
protection and nutrition of plants. Biotechnol Adv 29(6):792–803
Goswami A, Roy I, Sengupta S, Debnath N (2010) Novel applications of solid and liquid formula-
tions of nanoparticles against insect pests and pathogens. Thin Solid Films 519(3):1252–1257
Gruere G, Narrod C, Abbott L (2011) Agriculture, food, and water nanotechnologies for the poor:
opportunities and constraints, Policy briefs 19, vol 1. International Food Policy Research
Institute (IFPRI), Washington, D.C., p 4
Hall JL, Williams LE (2003) Transition metal transporters in plants. J Exp Bot 54(393):2601–2613
Helaly MN, El-Metwally MA, El-Hoseiny H, Omar SA, El-Sheery NI (2014) Effect of nanoparti-
cles on biological contamination of ‘in vitro’ cultures and organogenic regeneration of banana.
Aust J Crop Sci 8(4):612
Jia G, Wang H, Yan L, Wang X, Pei R, Yan T, Zhao Y, Guo X (2005) Cytotoxicity of carbon
nanomaterials: single-wall nanotube, multi-wall nanotube, and fullerene. Environ Sci Technol
39(5):1378–1383
Joo SH, Cheng F (2006) Nanotechnology for environmental remediation. Springer-Verlag,
New York. https://doi.org/10.1007/b137366
Kah M (2015) Nanopesticides and nanofertilizers: emerging contaminants or opportunities for risk
mitigation. Front Chem 3:64
Kaushik P, Shakil NA, Kumar J, Singh MK, Singh MK, Yadav SK (2013) Development of con-
trolled release formulations of thiram employing amphiphilic polymers and their bioefficacy
evaluation in seed quality enhancement studies. J Environ Sci Health Part B 48(8):677–685
Kim D, Jeong S, Moon J (2006) Synthesis of silver nanoparticles using the polyol process and the
influence of precursor injection. Nanotechnology 17(16):4019
Knox JP (1995) The extracellular matrix in higher plants. 4. Developmentally regulated proteogly-
cans and glycoproteins of the plant cell surface. FASEB J 9(11):1004–1012
Sci 101(1):73–78
Kumari M, Mukherjee A, Chandrasekaran N (2009) Genotoxicity of silver nanoparticles in Allium
cepa. Sci Total Environ 407(19):5243–5246
Kurepa J, Paunesku T, Vogt S, Arora H, Rabatic BM, Lu J, Wanzer MB, Woloschak GE, Smalle
JA (2010) Uptake and distribution of ultrasmall anatase TiO2 Alizarin red S nanoconjugates in
Arabidopsis thaliana. Nano Lett 10(7):2296–2302
growth. Environ Pollut 150(2):243–250
Lin S, Reppert J, Hu Q, Hudson JS, Reid ML, Ratnikova TA, Rao AM, Luo H, Ke PC (2009) Uptake,
translocation, and transmission of carbon nanomaterials in rice plants. Small 5(10):1128–1132
Loha KM, Shakil NA, Kumar J, Singh MK, Adak T, Jain S (2011) Release kinetics of β-cyfluthrin
from its encapsulated formulations in water. J Environ Sci Health Part B 46(3):201–206
Loha KM, Shakil NA, Kumar J, Singh MK, Srivastava C (2012) Bio-efficacy evaluation of nano-
formulations of β-cyfluthrin against Callosobruchus maculatus (Coleoptera: Bruchidae). J
Environ Sci Health Part B 47(7):687–691
Lopez-Moreno ML, de la Rosa G, Hernández-Viezcas JA, Peralta-Videa JR, Gardea-Torresdey JL
(2010) X-ray absorption spectroscopy (XAS) corroboration of the uptake and storage of CeO2
nanoparticles and assessment of their differential toxicity in four edible plant species. J Agric
Food Chem 58(6):3689–3693
Ma X, Geiser-Lee J, Deng Y, Kolmakov A (2010) Interactions between engineered nanoparti-
cles (ENPs) and plants: phytotoxicity, uptake and accumulation. Sci Total Environ 408(16):
3053–3061
Majumdar S, Peralta-Videa JR, Bandyopadhyay S, Castillo-Michel H, Hernandez-Viezcas JA,
Sahi S, Gardea-Torresdey JL (2014) Exposure of cerium oxide nanoparticles to kidney bean
shows disturbance in the plant defense mechanisms. J Hazard Mater 278:279–287
Rajeshwari A, Kavitha S, Alex SA, Kumar D, Mukherjee A, Chandrasekaran N, Mukherjee A
(2015) Cytotoxicity of aluminum oxide nanoparticles on Allium cepa root tip—effects of oxi-
dative stress generation and biouptake. Environ Sci Pollut Res 22(14):11057–11066
Milani N, McLaughlin MJ, Stacey SP, Kirby JK, Hettiarachchi GM, Beak DG, Cornelis G (2012)
Dissolution kinetics of macronutrient fertilizers coated with manufactured zinc oxide nanopar-
ticles. J Agric Food Chem 60(16):3991–3998
Millán G, Agosto F, Vázquez M (2008) Use of clinoptilolite as a carrier for nitrogen fertilizers in
soils of the Pampean regions of Argentina. Cien Inv Agr 35(3):293–302
Biol Sci 1(10):414–419
Murashov V (2006) Comments on “Particle surface characteristics may play an important role in
phytotoxicity of alumina nanoparticles” In: Yang L, Watts, DJ, Toxicology Letters 158, 122-
132. Toxicol Lett 164(2):185
Navarro E, Baun A, Behra R, Hartmann NB, Filser J, Miao AJ, Quigg A, Santschi PH, Sigg L
(2008) Environmental behavior and ecotoxicity of engineered nanoparticles to algae, plants,
and fungi. Ecotoxicology 17(5):372–386
Ovečka M, Lang I, Baluška F, Ismail A, Illeš P, Lichtscheidl IK (2005) Endocytosis and vesicle
trafficking during tip growth of root hairs. Protoplasma 226(1-2):39–54
Owolade OF, Ogunleti DO, Adenekan MO (2008) Titanium dioxide affects disease development
and yield of edible cowpea. EJEAF Chem 7(50):2942–2947
Pankaj, Shakil NA, Kumar J, Singh MK, Singh K (2012) Bioefficacy evaluation of controlled
release formulations based on amphiphilic nano-polymer of carbofuran against Meloidogyne
incognita infecting tomato. J Environ Sci Health B 47(6):520–528
Priester JH, Ge Y, Mielke RE, Horst AM, Moritz SC, Espinosa K, Gelb J, Walker SL, Nisbet RM,
An YJ, Schimel JP (2012) Soybean susceptibility to manufactured nanomaterials with evidence
for food quality and soil fertility interruption. Proc Natl Acad Sci 109(37):E2451–E2456
Raliya R, Tarafdar JC (2013) ZnO nanoparticle biosynthesis and its effect on phosphorous-
mobilizing enzyme secretion and gum contents in cluster bean (Cyamopsis tetragonoloba L.).
Agric Res 2(1):48–57
Ramesh M, Palanisamy K, Babu K, Sharma NK (2014) Effects of bulk & nano-titanium diox-
ide and zinc oxide on physio-morphological changes in Triticum aestivum L. J Global Biosci
3:415–422
Raskar SV, Laware SL (2014) Effect of zinc oxide nanoparticles on cytology and seed germination
in onion. Int J Curr Microbiol App Sci 3(2):467–473
Rezvani N, Sorooshzadeh A, Farhadi N (2012) Effect of nano-silver on growth of saffron in flood-

ing stress. World Acad Sci Eng Technol 6(1):517–522
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):3485–3498
Sagadevan S, Periasamy M (2014) Recent trends in nanobiosensors and their applications -a
Salama HM (2012) Effects of silver nanoparticles in some crop plants, common bean (Phaseolus
Sasson Y, Levy-Ruso G, Toledano O, Ishaaya I (2007) Nanosuspensions: emerging novel agro-
chemical formulations. In: Insecticides design using advanced technologies 2007. Springer,
Berlin, pp 1–39
Savithramma N, Ankanna S, Bhumi G (2012) Effect of nanoparticles on seed germination and
seedling growth of Boswellia ovalifoliolata an endemic and endangered medicinal tree taxon.
Nano Vision 2(1):2
germination of lettuce seeds. Water Air Soil Pollut 197(1-4):143–148
Sharma A, Singh HP, Batish DR, Kohli RK (2019) Chemical profiling, cytotoxicity and phytotox-
icity of foliar volatiles of Hyptis suaveolens. Ecotoxicol Environ Saf 171:863–870
Biotechnol 167(8):2225–2233
safety. J Phytology 2(4):78–82
Siddiqui MH, Al-Whaibi MH (2014) Role of nano-SiO2 in germination of tomato (Lycopersicum
esculentum). Saudi J Biol Sci 21:13–17
Siddiqui MH, Al-Whaibi MH, Firoz M, Al-Khaishany MY (2015) Role of nanoparticles in
plants. In: Siddiqui M, Al-Whaibi M, Mohammad F (eds) Nanotechnology and plant sciences.
Springer, Cham, pp 19–35
Stampoulis D, Sinha SK, White JC (2009) Assay-dependent phytotoxicity of nanoparticles to
plants. Environ Sci Technol 43(24):9473–9479
Suriyaprabha R, Karunakaran G, Yuvakkumar R, Rajendran V, Kannan N (2012) Silica nanopar-
ticles for increased silica availability in maize (Zea mays. L) seeds under hydroponic condi-
tions. Curr Nanosci 8(6):902–908
Susha VS, Chinnamuthu CR (2012) Synthesis and characterization of Iron based nanoparticles for
the degradation of atrazine herbicide. Res J Nanosci Nanotechnol 2:79–86
Syu YY, Hung JH, Chen JC, Chuang HW (2014) Impacts of size and shape of silver nanoparticles
on Arabidopsis plant growth and gene expression. Plant Physiol Biochem 83:57–64
Tilman D, Cassman KG, Matson PA, Naylor R, Polasky S (2002) Agricultural sustainability and
intensive production practices. Nature 418(6898):671
Tong Z, Bischoff M, Nies L, Applegate B, Turco RF (2007) Impact of fullerene (C60) on a soil
microbial community. Environ Sci Technol 41(8):2985–2991
Uddin W, Viji G, Schumann GL, Boyd SH (2003) Detection of Pyricularia grisea causing gray
leaf spot of perennial ryegrass turf by a rapid immuno-recognition assay. Plant Dis 87:772–778
Uzu G, Sobanska S, Sarret G, Munoz M, Dumat C (2010) Foliar lead uptake by lettuce exposed to
atmospheric fallouts. Environ Sci Technol 44(3):1036–1042
van Doorn R, Szemes M, Bonants P, Kowalchuk GA, Salles JF, Ortenberg E, Schoen CD (2007)
Quantitative multiplex detection of plant pathogens using a novel ligation probe-based sys-
tem coupled with universal, high-throughput real-time PCR on open arrays. BMC Genomics
14:276
Vinopal S, Ruml T, Kotrba P (2007) Biosorption of Cd2+ and Zn2+ by cell surface-engineered
Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Int Biodeterior Biodegradation 60(2):96–102
Wanyika H, Gatebe E, Kioni P, Tang Z, Gao Y (2012) Mesoporous silica nanoparticles carrier for
urea: potential applications in agrochemical delivery systems. J Nanosci Nanotechnol 12(3):
2221–2228
Xiang C, Taylor AG, Hinestroza JP, Frey MW (2013) Controlled release of nonionic com-
pounds from poly (lactic acid)/cellulose nanocrystal nanocomposite fibers. J Appl Polym Sci
127(1):79–86
Xingmao M, Geiser-lee J, Deng Y, Kolmakov A (2010) Interactions between engineered nanoparti-
cles ENPs and plants: phytotoxcity, uptake and accumulation. Sci Total Environ 408:3053–3061
Yan S, Zhao L, Li H, Zhang Q, Tan J, Huang M, He S, Li L (2013) Single-walled carbon nanotubes
selectively influence maize root tissue development accompanied by the change in the related
gene expression. J Hazard Mater 246:110–118
Yang L, Watts DJ (2005) Particle surface characteristics may play an important role in phytotoxic-
ity of alumina nanoparticles. Toxicol Lett 158(2):122–132
Zhang P, Ma Y, Liu S, Wang G, Zhang J, He X, Zhang J, Rui Y, Zhang Z (2017) Phytotoxicity,
uptake and transformation of nano-CeO2 in sand cultured romaine lettuce. Environ Pollut
220:1400–1408
Zhao X, Hilliard LR, Mechery SJ, Wang Y, Bagwe RP, Jin S, Tan W (2004) A rapid bioassay for sin-
gle bacterial cell quantitation using bio-conjugated nanoparticles. PNAS 101(42):15027–15032
Index
A gene expressions, 17
Abiotic stress, 148, 153 industries communication strategies, 29
Accumulation of abscisic acid (ABA), 153 inorganic nanomaterials, 17
Actinomycetes, 174 macro policies, 16
Activated carbon (AC), 67 nanofertilizers, 17
Agglomeration, 177 nanoparticles, 25, 26
Agricultural sector, 65, 85, 178, 188 nanotechnology, 18, 21
Agricultural sustainable development, 120 nutrients, 21, 22
Agriculture pesticides, 15
development, 114 pests, 21, 22
food supply chain, 118–120 plant diseases, 23
gaps and obstacles, 121–124 plant hormones, 21, 22
micro- and nano-encapsulation, 115, 116 recycling agricultural waste, 25, 26
nano-biosensors (see Nano-biosensors) risk assessment, nanomaterials, 27
nano delivery systems, 116, 117 rural distress, 16
nanofertilizers, 120, 121 smart delivery systems, 21, 22
nanoherbicides, 122 socio-economic issues, 28, 29
nano-pesticides, 120, 122, 123 technology fatigue, 16
plant growth, 118 Agriculture sector, 18, 21, 64
precision farming, 116 Agri-nanotechnology, 36
smart agro-food sector, 114 Agrochemicals, 16, 79
soil quality improvement, 117 Agro-food business, 178
sustainable intensification, 117 Agro-formulations, 190
Agriculture growth and India Agro-industry, 189
agriculture sector, 18, 21 agricultural crops, 49, 50
agri-value chain, 17 CNP, 45, 46
agrochemicals, 16 MWCNTs, 46
applications, 18–20 plant induced resistance, 47, 48
cereals, 15 silicon nanoparticles, 47
crop biotechnology, 24, 25 TiO2 nanoparticles, 46
economic energetic forces, 17 zinc oxide nanoparticles, 47
energy conversion and storage, 16 Agro-nanobiotechnology, 178
fertilizers, 15, 16 Agro-nanotechnology, 65, 66, 124
food processing industry, 17 Aleurone cell layer, 71
food system security monitoring, 17 Alginate/chitosan nanoparticles, 82

Nanotechnology in the Life Sciences, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-39978-8
224 Index
Aloe vera, 75 innovative genome editing tool, 197, 198

Anticancer compound, 67 molecular mechanisms, 196
Antidiabetic compound, 67 organisms and tissues, 196
Antioxidant enzymes, 154 pathogen resistance, 196
Aquaporins, 67 physiological and molecular
Ascorbate, 153 interferences, 201
Aspergillus niger, 40 plants, 195
Avermectin, 8 RNAi technologies, 196
sustainable productive agriculture, 201
TALEN-based biotechnology, 202
B transcription modulation, 201
Bacopa monnieri, 75 transgenic rice, 198
Bacteria, 24, 174 Crop biotechnology, 24, 25
Bioactive molecules, 81, 82 Crop disease management, 77
Bio-fertilizers, 178 Crop growth, 66–68
Biofortification agents, 72 Crop improvement
Biofuel production, 44 agricultural productivity, 65
Biogeochemical cycling, 44 agriculture sustainability, 65
Biomass, 164, 165 agro-nanotechnology, 65, 66
Bright-field imaging, 68, 165 beneficial role, NPs, 64, 65
Business Communications Company biotechnology, 65
(BCC), 189 CNMs, 66–68
MBNPs, 68, 71
metal oxide nanoparticles, 72, 73
C nanomaterials, 66
Carbon nanomaterials (CNMs), 50, 66–68 nanotechnology, 64
Carbon nanotubes (CNTs), 42, 130, 139, plant protection chemicals, 64
147, 155 Crop production
Carboxymethyl cellulose (CMC), 213 agriculture, 163
Carum copticum, 156 biomass and fruit yield, 165
Cation exchange capacity (CEC), 44 carbon nanotubes, 165
Cellulosic feedstocks, 26 ENPs, 164
Cereals, 15 iodine fumes, 167
Cerium oxide nanoparticles (CeO2 NPs), 73 land and water resources, 163
Chelate formations, 174 magnetic NPs, 166
Chitosan nanoparticles (CNP), 45, 46 metabolic pathways, 166, 167
Conjugated polymer nanoparticles (CPNs), 50 nano-agrotechnology, 163
Controlled release modes, 10 nanotechnology, 163
Conventional fertilizers, 10, 11, 101, 102, 104, pest and disease management, 164
106, 208, 209 physiological and molecular levels, 165
Conventional pressure treatment methods, 7 phytotoxic effects, 166
Copper hydroxide, 187 plant protection, 163
Cost-effective approach, 212, 213 seed germination, 164
CRISPR/Cas9 seedling growth, 164
application, 198 silver nanoparticles, 165
biology, 195 TiO2 nanoparticles, 164
biotechnology, 195 Crop yields, 163, 165
cellular and molecular biology, 201 Cu nanoparticles, 78
conventional transgene, 196 Curvularia leaf spot (CLS), 48
genome editing tools, 199–200
genome modification tool, plants, 196, 197
GMOs, 195 D
gRNA modules, 200 Defense-related enzyme activities, 45
GVR, 201 Develop green approaches, 113
immune system, 201 DNA-based nanosensors, 41
Index 225
DNA transgenics, 82 pesticides, 79, 80

Double stranded breaks (DSBs), 196 precision farming, 83, 84
Drought stress e-Nose, 134
abiotic stresses, 148, 153 Ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA), 105
AgNPs, 156 e-Tongue, 134
agricultural sector, 145, 146 European Food Safety Authority (EFSA), 86
anthocyanin, 155 Extracellular polymeric substances (EPS), 173
antioxidant enzymes, 154, 155
antioxidants, 155
biological applications, 155 F
biological systems, 148 Fertilizers, 35, 80, 81
biotechnology and agriculture, 145 First Green Revolution, 16
cellular events, 153 Flavonoids, 75
climate change, 148 Food industry, 48
environmental stresses plants, 148 Food safety
intracellular water metabolism, 155 Au-Ag alloy nanoparticles, 42
mechanical–physical barrier, 156 carbon nanotubes, 42
nanobiotechnology, 145 economic value, nanotechnology, 41
nano-fertilizers, 146 engineered nanosensors, 42
nanomaterials, 147, 149–151 freshness and spoilage indicators, 43
nanoparticles, 146–148 MWCNT-based biosensor, 42
silica, 156 nanobiosensors, 42
TiO2, 154 nano-compounds, 42
nano-sized ZnO and CuO, 154 nanosensors, 42
nanotechnology, 145, 148, 153 sensors, 42
nonporous material silica, 156 smart packaging, 42
oxidative stress, 153 Food sector, 18, 27, 28
photosynthetic machinery, 153 Food system, 197
plant science, 146 Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy
plant species, 145 (FTIR), 68, 165
radical scavenging compounds, 153 Fungal pathogens, 188
seed germination, 155 Fungi, 23, 24
E G
Eco-friendly, 186–188, 190 Gelatin, 7
EDTA-chelating agent, 105 Gemini virus (GVR), 201
Electrochemical nanosensors, 133 Gene delivery, 39, 51
Electron diffraction, 6 Genetically modified organisms (GMOs),
“Electronic tongue”, 43 38, 86, 195
Electrospinning, 26 Geographical information system
Emulsifiable concentrates (ECs), 4 (GIS), 136
Encapsulation methods, 115 Geosynchronous positioning system
Engineered/modified nanoparticles, 147 (GPS), 136
Engineered nanomaterials (ENMs), Global positioning system (GPS) system, 83
44, 164 Glutathione, 153
Engineered nanoparticles (ENPs), 66, 164, 215 Gold nanoparticles (AuNPs), 212
application, 69–70 Green Revolution, 172
bioactive molecules, 81, 82
consumer and commercial products, 78
fertilizers, 80, 81 H
nanoherbicides, 82, 83 Helicoverpa armigera, 188
nanomedicine, 78 Hydrological cycle, 44
nanopharmacology, 78 Hydroxyapatite (HA), 179
optimized nutrient management, 79 Hydroxyapatite nanoparticle (HANP), 2
226 Index
Hyperforin, 167 efficient pest management, 186

Hypericin, 167 nano-devices, 186
nano-fertilizers, 186, 187
nano-fungicides, 187, 188
I nano-herbicides, 187
In-line methods, 108 nano-insecticides, 188, 189
Innovative and promising approach, 213 nano-pesticides, 188
Intelligent nano-fertilizer, 3 agricultural products, 185
Interfacial layer, 146 conventional agricultural practices, 185
Iron oxide nanoparticles (Fe2O3 NPs), 72 vs. conventional agrochemicals, 10, 11
Isoflavonoids, 75 economic importance, 189
emerging technology, 185
and environment, 190
L fertilizers, 186
Layer-by-layer (LbL), 213 food production, 185
Lipid exchange envelope penetration (LEEP), 51 human population, 185
Liposomes, 49 nano-biosensors, 3
Loss control urea (LCU), 3 nano-clays, 3
nano-fertilizers, 2
nano-pesticides, 4–6
M pesticides, 186
Macronutrients, 107, 108, 176 soil quality, 185
Magic bullets, 164–166 Nano-agrotechnology, 163
Magnetic nanoparticles (MNPs), 130 Nanobarcodes, 40, 134
Malondialdehyde, 153 Nano-based delivery system, 82
Mancozeb, 187 Nano-biosensors, 3, 40
Manufactured nano-materials (MNM), 216 agriculture/precision farming, 136
Mesoporous silica NPs (MSNPs), 8, 25, 50, biosensors, 129
79, 81, 179 crop protection, 138–139
Metabolic pathways, 166, 167 development, 130–131
Metal-based nanoparticles (MBNPs), 68, 71, 165 disease management, 136, 137
Metal ions, 177 electrochemical nanosensors, 133
Metal oxide nanoparticles, 78 e-Nose and e-Tongue, 134
Methacrylic acid (MAA) nanoparticles, 81 nano-barcode technology, 134
Microbes, 173–175 nanosensors, 132–133
Microbial/phyto-engineering approach, 114 nanotechnology, 130
Microbial polysaccharides, 173 optical nanosensors, 133, 134
Micro-emulsions, 4, 5 smart delivery systems, 136, 137
Micro-encapsulation, 115–116 soil health, 136, 137
Micronutrients, 176 sustainable agriculture, 137–138
Microorganisms, 175 types, 131
Millennium development goals, 36 Nanobiotechnology, 65, 145
Mineral micro-nutrients, 10 plant protection and nutrition, 210
Molybdenum nanoparticles (Mo NPs), 71, 166 Nano-capsules, 6, 25
Multi-walled carbon nanotubes (MWCNTs), Nanocarriers, 49
22, 41, 46, 165, 215, 216 Nanochips, 39
Mycogenic approach, 174 Nano-clays, 3
Myconanotechnology, 174 Nanocobalt, 75
Nano-cochleates, 119
Nano-composite polymers, 2
N Nano delivery systems, 116, 117
Nano-agrochemicals Nano-devices, 113
advantages Nanodiagnostic methods, 38
agricultural sector, 186 Nano-dispersion, 5, 6
crop production, 186 Nanoemulsion, 5, 80
Index 227
Nano-enabled agriculture microbes, 173–175

agri-based chemicals, 38 nano-agribusiness, 172
agri-nanotechnology, 36 nano-biotechnologies, 172
application, nanotechnology, 36 phyto-nanotechnology approach, 175, 176
crop plants, 36 soil microflora, 172
crop protection, 38 Nano-fungicides, 187, 188
disease management, 38 Nanoherbicides, 82, 83, 187
engineered nanoparticles, 36, 37 Nano-insecticides, 188, 189
fertilizers, 35, 36 Nano-material based systems, 113
food safety (see Food safety) Nanomaterial fabrication, 174
leaves, 38 Nanomaterials (NMs), 18, 44, 118, 147
nanocides, 37 Nano-metals, 9
nanodiagnostic methods, 38 Nanoparticle-mediated delivery system, 82
NP-mediated chloroplast transgene Nanoparticle-mediated transformation, 51
delivery, 50, 51 Nanoparticles (NPs), 38, 133, 146–148
nanosciences, 36 bacteria, 24
nanosensors, 38 fungi, 23, 24
nanotechnology (see interaction with plants, 214
Nanotechnology (NTs)) phytotoxicity, 215–217
natural defense response, 37 plant virus, 24
natural gas and petroleum, 36 toxic effects, 218
nutrient management, 37 Nano-pesticides, 4–6, 188
organic/inorganic nanomaterials, 36 Nano-phytopathology, 39
pathogens, 37 Nano-rods (NRs), 130
pesticides, 35, 36 Nanoscale drug-delivery systems, 50
pests, 37 Nanosensors, 21, 38, 40, 41, 83, 114,
plant–pathogen interaction, 38 118–120, 125
plants cells, 38 Nanosilica, 39
radiometric nanosensing platform, 38 Nanosized sulfonated polyaniline
scientific and technological innovation, 35 (nSPANI), 45
social and economic actions, 35 Nano-spheres, 6
soil security, 44, 45 Nano-suspensions, 5
Nano-encapsulated nutrients, 36 Nano-tech approach, 118–120
Nanoencapsulation, 39, 115–116 Nanotechnology (NT), 100–102, 107, 108,
Nanofertilizers, 2, 17, 36, 81, 178, 186, 187, 148, 153
208, 209 agriculture, 1, 207, 208, 215, 217
economic aspect, 106 atomic distribution, 1
formulations and conventional controlled release modes, 10
fertilizers, 102 conventional fertilizers, 208, 209
nano-formulations, 101 cost-effective approach, 212, 213
products-novel boon, 104 disease management
scope, 103 biomarkers, 39
Nano-fertilizer technology, 10 fluorescent silica nanoprobes, 39
Nanofibres, 25 insecticidal properties, 39
Nanoforms, 21 nanoalumina, 39
Nano-formulations nanobarcodes, 40
agricultural sector, 171, 172 nanochips, 39
agriculture, 171 nanoencapsulation, 39
bio-fertilizers, 178 nano-phytopathology, 39
conventional approach, 172 nanosensors, 40, 41
ecosystem, 172 nanosilica, 39
fertility, 172 silver NPs, 39
field of nanobiotechnology, 173 effective duration, nutrient release, 11
green synthesis, 176–179 food sector, 27, 28
losses of biological resources, 171 loss rate, fertilizer nutrients, 11
228 Index
Nanotechnology (NT) (cont.) Plant pathogens, 77

mineral micro-nutrients, 10 Plant protection, 209, 211
nano-agrochemicals (see Plant transformation efficiency, 51
Nano-agrochemicals) Plant virus, 24
nano-clusters, 1 Pollutants, 190
nanofertilizers, 10, 208, 209 Poly (acrylic acid)-b-poly (butyl acrylate), 79
nano-metals, 9 Polyacrylamide, 3
nano-scale, 1 Polyacrylamide hydrogel, 2
nutrient uptake efficiency, 10 Polyaniline boronic acid, 41
pesticides and herbicides, 213 Polycaprolactone (PCL), 2
plant growth and yield production, 211, 212 Polyethylene glycol (PEG), 211
plant protection, 209, 211 Polyketides, 76
polymer-based formulations, 6, 7 Polymer-based formulations, 6, 7
porous hollow silica nanoparticles, 8, 9 Polysaccharides, 173
Nano rock phosphate (RP), 106 Polyvinyl alcohol (PVOH), 79
Natural organic substance (NOM), 216 Porous hollow silica NPs (PHSNs), 8, 9,
Natural products, 166 39, 41, 80
Next generation technology, 136 Potato dextrose agar (PDA), 39
Nexuses embody, 44 Precision farming, 21, 135–137
Nonporous material silica, 156 Pseudomonas chlororaphis O6 (PcO6), 154
Novaluron, 6
Novel approach, 213
NP-based enzymatic biosensors, 41 Q
Nutrient uptake efficiency, 10 Quantum dots (QDs), 130, 133, 138
Nutrients, 21, 22
R
O Radical scavenging compounds, 153
Oil-in-water (O/W) emulsions, 4 Raman spectroscopy, 51, 67
Oligonucleotides, 196 Reactive oxygen species (ROS), 153
Optical nanosensors, 133, 134 Redox reactions, 174
Oxidative stress, 153 Remote sensing (RS), 136
Research-based evidences, 86
Research and Development (R&D), 107
P Restriction fragment length polymorphism
Pathogenic fungi, 77 (RFLP), 211
Pesticides, 35 Rural distress, 16
Pests, 21, 22
Phenols, 75
Phenyl propanoids, 76 S
Physical and chemical approaches, 209 Saccharomyces cerevisiae, 40
Physicochemical properties, 84 Sclerotinia sclerotiorum, 40
Phytochemical analysis, 76 Secondary metabolites, 166, 167
Phytochemicals, 166 agriculture sector, 64
Phyto-medicines, 166 application, nanoparticles, 74
Phyto-nanotechnology approach, 175, 176 Fe NPs, 74
Phyto-pathogenic fungi, 187 influence of soil, 83–85
Phytopathogens, 77 nano-enabled disease suppression, 76–78
Plant biotechnology, 167 nanotoxicology, 85, 86
Plant diseases, 23 phenols, 75
Plant genetic engineering, 51 phenyl propanoids, 76
Plant hormones, 21, 22 polyketides, 76
Plant induced resistance, 47, 48 regulatory perspectives, 85, 86
Plant nanotoxicology, 85 terpenoids, 74–76
Index 229
Second Green Revolution, 16 Terpenoids, 74–76

Seed germination, 85 TiO2 nanoparticles, 46
Self-assembly preparation method, 7 Traditional farming approaches, 208
Silicon nanoparticles, 47 Transmission electron microscopy (TEM),
Silver nanoparticles (AgNPs), 68, 77, 155, 212 9, 51, 67
Single superphosphate (SSP), 106 Tribolium castaneum, 189
Single-walled carbon nanotubes (SWCNTs), 2002 United Nations Johannesburg
22, 38, 50, 165, 216 Summit on Sustainable
Smart delivery systems, 21, 22, 100, 134, 136, Development, 16
137, 139
Smart packaging systems, 119
Socio-economic issues, 28, 29 V
Soil-based life cycle study, 67 Validamycin, 8, 80
Soil degradation, 44 Variable rate technology
Soil quality improvement, 117 (VRT), 136
Soil security, 44, 45
Spinach leaves, 72
Surface plasmon resonance (SPR), 40 W
Surfactants/polymeric stabilizers, 6 Wireless nanosensors, 135
Sustainable agriculture, 137–138 Wireless sensor network (WSN), 135
Sustainable intensification, 117
Synthesis, 11
Synthetic fertilizers, 189 X
X-ray diffraction, 6
T
Tanacetum parthenium, 156 Z
Technology fatigue, 16 Zinc nanoparticles (ZnONPs), 212

10.1007@978 3 030 39978 8

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

10.1007@978 3 030 39978 8

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

10.1007@978 3 030 39978 8

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Nanotechnology in the Life Sciences

Khalid Rehman Hakeem

More information about this series at http://www.springer.com/series/15921

ISSN 2523-8027 ISSN 2523-8035 (electronic)

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Fatima bint Muhammad Al-Fihriya

Agriculture is the backbone of developing nations and

importance and practices of nano-biosensors as a next-generation diagnostic tool to

Dr. Mohd. Sayeed Akhtar

Agriculture is regarded as the backbone of the national economy of the developing

Jeddah, Saudi Arabia Khalid Rehman Hakeem

Nanotechnology: An Overview ���������������������������������������������������������������������� 1

Development of Nano-formulations via Green Synthesis Approach ���������� 171

Khalid Rehman Hakeem, PhD, is Professor at King

Tanveer Bilal Pirzadah, PhD, is Assistant Professor

S. T. Salam (*) · P. A. Dar

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020 1

Nano-agrochemicals have been categorized into the following types:

Nano-enabled fertilizers can be applied in agriculture through various forms. Some

Nano-pesticides are in nanoparticle form so they can be easily taken up by plants

 ormulations Aiming to Increase the Solubility of Poorly Water-Soluble

The apparent solubility of poorly water-soluble active ingredients by making their

(disease protection for soybean; ObservatoryNano 2010). Micro-emulsions have

of surfactants or polymeric stabilizers is sometimes necessary (Muller and

3  ormulations Aimed for Controlled/Targeted Release and/

Slow/targeted release formulations are primarily aimed at active ingredients that

3.1 Polymer-Based Formulations

The majority of polymer-based nano-formulations have the controlled release of

to be borne in mind when considering the product most commonly taken as an

3.2 Porous Hollow Silica Nanoparticles

the nano-ionic pesticide avermectin) resulted in the formation of structures with

4 Nano-agrochemicals Versus Conventional Agrochemicals

Nano-fertilizer technology is very innovative technology intended to enhance the

4.1 Solubility and Dispersion of Mineral Micro-nutrients

Nano-sized formulation of mineral micro-nutrients may improve solubility and dis-

4.2 Nutrient Uptake Efficiency

Nano-structured formulation might increase fertilizer efficiency and uptake ratio of

4.3 Controlled Release Modes

4.4 Effective Duration of Nutrient Release

Nano-structured formulation can extend effective duration of nutrient supply of fer-

4.5 Loss Rate of Fertilizer Nutrients

5 Conclusion and Future Perspective

In conclusion, nanotechnology is an emerging field that plays a pivotal role in the

Kaizar Hossain, Syed Zaghum Abbas, Akil Ahmad, Mohd Rafatullah,

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020 15

2  pplications of Nanotechnology and Nanomaterials

In the strategic Research Agenda 2007–2020 of the world technology platform on

3 Nanotechnology and Agriculture Sector

In terms of agriculture, nanotech research and development are likely to facilitate

Table 1 Application of nanotechnology in food science and its allied fields

4  mart Delivery Systems for Pests, Nutrients, and Plant

SWCNT MWCNT 1-2 nm 2-25 nm

5 Nano-formulations for the Control of Plant Diseases

5.1 Nanotechnology for Detecting Plant Diseases

6 Plant Pathogens in Biosynthesis of Nanoparticles

The research on nanoscience and nanotechnology essentially involves preparation

are less amenable to genetic manipulation compared to prokaryotes. Therefore, any

6.3 Plant Virus

Plant virus especially spherical/icosahedral viruses represent the examples of natu-

Jeddah, Saudi Arabia Khalid Rehman Hakeem

Nanotechnology: An Overview �� 1

Development of Nano-formulations via Green Synthesis Approach �� 171

ormulations Aiming to Increase the Solubility of Poorly Water-Soluble

3 ormulations Aimed for Controlled/Targeted Release and/

3.1 Polymer-Based Formulations

3.2 Porous Hollow Silica Nanoparticles

4 Nano-agrochemicals Versus Conventional Agrochemicals

4.1 Solubility and Dispersion of Mineral Micro-nutrients

4.2 Nutrient Uptake Efficiency

4.3 Controlled Release Modes

4.4 Effective Duration of Nutrient Release

4.5 Loss Rate of Fertilizer Nutrients

5 Conclusion and Future Perspective

2 pplications of Nanotechnology and Nanomaterials

3 Nanotechnology and Agriculture Sector

4 mart Delivery Systems for Pests, Nutrients, and Plant

5 Nano-formulations for the Control of Plant Diseases

5.1 Nanotechnology for Detecting Plant Diseases

6 Plant Pathogens in Biosynthesis of Nanoparticles

6.3 Plant Virus

7 Amalgamation of Nanotechnology and Crop Biotechnology

8 Nanoparticles and Recycling Agricultural Waste

9 Nanotechnology in Food Sector

10 isk Assessment of Nanomaterials in Agriculture

11 Socio-Economic Issues of Agricultural Nanotechnology

12 Current and Future Developments

2 Disease Management Through Nanotechnology

3 nhanced Food Safety Through Sensors for the Detection

3.1 Freshness and Spoilage Indicators

4 Nanotechnology in Enhancing Soil Security

5 Important Nanoparticles in the Agro-Industry

5.1 Chitosan Nanoparticles (CNP)

pathogenesis-related proteins (PRP), defense-related enzymes (DRE), secondary

5.2 TiO2 Nanoparticles

5.3 ulti-Walled Carbon Nanotubes (MWCNTs)

5.4 Silicon Nanoparticles

5.5 Zinc Oxide Nanoparticles

6 Plant Induced Resistance Through Nanoparticles

7 ngineered Water Nanostructures to Treat Food Surfaces

8 herapeutic Nanoparticles Deliver Nutrients

9 enetic Material Delivery via Nanoparticle-Mediated

10 Conclusion and Perspective

2 Agro-Nanotechnology and Crop Improvement

3 ole of Nanotechnology for Enhancement of Plant

3.1 rop Growth on Exposure to Carbon

3.2 Effect of Metal-Based Nanoparticles (MBNPs)

3.3 Effect of Metal Oxide Nanoparticles on Plants

3.4 ole of Nanotechnology for Enhancement