Abstract
By 2050, the global population is projected to reach nearly 9.6 billion, increasing demand for agriculture and placing more strain on the planet’s natural resources. Occurrence of widespread nutrient shortage in soil resulting from intensive cropping has expedited great economic losses for farmers. Application of conventional fertilizers on a large scale to boost agricultural output is not a lengthy solution because these are seen as two-edged swords due to their potential to harm soil structure, mineral cycles, soil biota, plants, and ultimately cause heritable mutations in succeeding generations while increasing crop productivity. The development of nanoagrochemicals, such as “nanopesticides” and “nanofertilizers,” has been a major focus of research in the field of agriculture-related nanotechnology. In particular, the basic issues with conventional fertilizers that influence agriculture could be systematically addressed by nanotechnology. The purpose of this paper is to update readers on the status of nanotechnology in this domain and to highlight prospects for the application of nanotechnologies in the field of fertilizers and plant nutrition. The following themes will mostly be investigated in this review: comparison of results of application of conventional and nanofertilizers, updated role of nanofertilizers in agriculture, green synthesis of nanoparticle, implications of nanoparticles on soil health, and current barriers and gaps in use of nanotechnology for crop production. In addition, the future challenges have also been discussed in the present review article.
Graphical Abstract
Similar content being viewed by others
Explore related subjects
Discover the latest articles, news and stories from top researchers in related subjects.Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
1 Introduction
The production of an abundance of food to feed an expanding population is one of the key problems faced by the world for which some of the substitutes such as use of sustainable management techniques are proving to be mandatory (Chippa and Joshi 2016). Scarce resources and a rapidly expanding human population, which is predicted to exceed 9.6 billion by 2050, necessitate the development of highly efficient agriculture while reducing global poverty and hunger. Mineral fertilizers supply nutrients to plants for optimal output. However, current crop-farming techniques cannot meet soaring food demand without relying heavily on chemical fertilizers (Zhang et al. 2015). The global consumption of chemical fertilizers (N + P + K) has been increased from 46.31 million MT in 1965 to 190.81 million MT in 2019 (FAO 2022). In India, the total consumption of N, P, and K at the rate of 20.40, 8.98, and 3.15 million MT, respectively during 2020–2021 represented growth of 6.8, 17.2, and 21%, respectively, over 2019–2020 (FAI 2021).
Fertilizers are necessary for crop growth because they provide key nutrients for growing crops, raising crop yield, and quality. Crop macronutrient use efficiency, on the other hand, is extremely low, with nitrogen (N), phosphorous (P), and potassium (K) use efficiency ranging from 30–60, 10–20, and 30–50%, respectively (Ha et al. 2019). It signifies that 50–70% of N and K fertilizer and 80–90% of P fertilizer could not be assimilated by crops and are reintroduced into the environment (Ha et al. 2019). Chemical fertilizer residues not only cause health hazards, but also impair ecosystem sublevels including soil microbial flora, parasites, and the marine environment via runoff and eutrophication (Conley et al. 2009).
The synthetic chemical fertilizers are known to be a possible source of heavy metals and a source of natural radionuclides (Savci 2012). They mostly contain heavy metals like Hg, Cd, As, Pb, Cu, and Ni, as well as naturally occurring radionuclides such 238U, 232Th, and 210Po (Sonmez et al. 2007). Ionizing radiation from these radionuclides is emitted into the air by the factories that produce fertilizer and the farmers who apply fertilizer directly to the soil. Long-term exposure to these radiations emitted by fertilizers has the potential to cause cancer in people, as a result, there should be global awareness of these radiation concerns (Sonmez et al. 2007). In addition to affecting food security, using more chemical fertilizers degrades soil, emits greenhouse gases, contaminate water, and also the excess use of fertilizers leads to its entry into the food chain via absorption from soil (Wang et al. 2016). Additionally, overuse of chemical fertilizers raises the cost of production and diminishes growers' profit margins (Zulfiqar et al. 2019). Nanotechnology delivers disruptive, game-changing discoveries that can offer quick answers and solutions to problems affecting our society, the environment and agricultural production, as opposite to gradual improvements by other technologies (Zhao et al. 2019). Nanofertilizers are the most recent and technologically sophisticated method of progressively releasing nutrients into the soil in a regulated manner. They have the ability to break seeds and increase nutrient accessibility to the plants, hence enhancing economic yield. Due to their capacity to cover a large specific surface area, nanomaterials have advantages over other nutritional salts in terms of supporting crop growth and by preventing eutrophication and promoting agricultural sustainability, nanofertilizers have recently made it possible for significant improvements to be made in quality of agricultural production (Basavegowda and Baek 2021). Therefore, it is necessary to transform “traditional farming techniques” into “smart farming practices” by using cutting-edge technologies like nanotechnology for the creation of environmentally friendly crops production systems.
Tiny molecules called nanoparticle/nanoparticles (NP/NPs) range in size from one to one hundred nanometers (nm) and have a variety of physiochemical characteristics as compared to the bulk materials (El-Saadony et al. 2019, 2020; Reda et al. 2021). The NPs could increase fertilizer use efficiency of crop because the nano-scales enables their absorption by stomata and the trichome base; therefore, showing a positive effect on plant growth at lower doses than the bulk forms (Herrera et al. 2016). Furthermore, NPs have a large surface area, high capacity for absorption, and an accessible delivery system (Rameshaiah et al. 2015; Chhipa and Joshi 2016). On the basis of plant nutritional needs, nanofertilizers are categorized as macro-nanofertilizers, micro-nanofertilizers, nano-biofertilizers, nano-particulate fertilizers, and nano-coatings or packaging materials. The pertinent features of nanofertilizers are (1) delivery of appropriate nutrients to the plant, (2) reduction in cost of cultivation, (3) sustainable sources of plant nutrients, (4) effective fertilization, (5) essential reduction of environmental pollution (Guru et al. 2015).
Commercial applications of nanoformulations in agriculture include the utilization of, Cu, Mn, Mo, Zn, Fe, and C nanotubes as well as their oxides (Trobisch and Schilling 1970; Mahajan et al. 2011; Nekrasova et al. 2011; Ghafariyan et al. 2013; Pradhan et al. 2013; Taha et al. 2016; Alshaal and Ramady 2017). The behavior and impact of NPs on plants have been examined in a number of reviews but not a significant amount of information has been produced regarding the soil. Therefore, in order to fill this gap in the literature, this study tries to gather the information on different types of NP-based nanofertilizers, the manner in which plants absorb them, an updated comparison of conventional versus nanofertilizers in agriculture, updated research work of researchers on use of nanofertilizers in agriculture, biogenic or green synthesis of nanofertilizers, ways in which NPs affect the soil health and existing deficits and constraints in use of NPs. This literature review marks the first to combine any of these notions into a single piece of writing, as far as we know. In the agricultural sector, nanotechnology is a fast expanding subject that is almost always reaching new heights. There are numerous frequent advancements in this technology. It is therefore important to inform researchers of any new developments in nanotechnology. Although, it directly benefits soil and plants, as with many technologies, it also has unforeseen consequences. Therefore, through this article, we also intend to discuss negative effects related to use of nanofertilizers in order to keep researchers up to date.
2 Classification of Nanofertilizers
The nanofertilizers on the basis of mineral nutrients present in them, categories and mode of action can be divided into eight types (Fig. 1) (Salama et al. 2021).
2.1 On the Basis of Nutrients
A categorization of nanofertilizers predicated on their nutrient content is macro-nanofertilizers, micro-nanofertilizers, nano-biofertilizers, nano-particulate fertilizers, and nano-coating materials. Macronutrient nanofertilizers contain macronutrients (e.g., NPK) coupled with NPs to provide the plants with a specific amount of nutrients and lessen the high volume requirements (Prasad et al. 2017), whereas micro-nanofertilizers contain micronutrients (e.g., Zn, Cu, and Fe). Micronutrients are requisite for maintenance of metabolic processes in the plants and which the plant needs in miniscule quantities (Prasad et al. 2017). Nano-biofertilizers are fabricated of interaction between NPs and microorganisms. For instance, the interaction of gold NPs with rhizobacteria that encourage plant development results in nano-biofertilizers (Prasad et al. 2017). The amalgamated formulation of NPs and nanotubes create novel sophisticated substances that are active in nature and serve as nanofertilizers. These are known as nano-particulate fertilizers (Rastogi et al. 2017). The light layer substance known as nano-coating extends the shelf life of products (Sharma et al. 2020).
2.2 On the Basis of Mode of Action
The term controlled release nanofertilizers are frequently used for nanofertilizers where it is possible to regulate the rate, rhythm, and release of nutrients through preparation (Trenkel 2010). On the contrary, slow release nanofertlizers have nutrient discharge that is slower than other types; however, it is impossible to regulate the pace, pattern, or duration of nutrient release (Trenkel 2010; Jia et al. 2020). A composite material with at least a single dimension that is nanoscopic in size, i.e., around 10−9 m is known as nanocomposite. Nanocomposites are known to reveal rare properties because they are high-performance materials (Rathod 2020).
2.3 On the Basis of Different Categories
Nanoscale fertilizers are formulations having powder or fluid consistency containing desired nutrient elements at nanoscale dimensions (Liu and Lal 2016). In nanoscale additives, to create a large product, NPs are included (> 100 nm scale). These NPs may be an auxiliary material added for a concomitant purpose, such as soil/plant pathogen control or water retention (Mastronardi et al. 2015). Nanoscale coatings are nanoporous materials or nanothin sheets that impede the regulated release of nutrients. Zeolites, clays, and thin polymer coatings are a few examples (Mastronardi et al. 2015).
3 Uptake of Nanofertilizers by Plants
3.1 Foliar
Physiology of plant plays a crucial role in uptake of nanofertilizers (Schwab et al. 2016). Through endocytosis, the NPs might enter the plant cell from the cell membrane (Samaj et al. 2004; Etxeberria et al. 2006). The diameter of the stomata, which varies from 5 to 20 nm, determines the NPs’ access into the plant cell wall (Fleischer et al. 1999). They can also enter the plant cell through base of the trichrome. Two pathways, apoplastic and symplastic pathways, are used by plants to translocate NPs. Macromolecules migrate through the outer membrane and the intercellular spaces through the apoplastic route. On the contrary, in the case of symplastic pathway, the movement occurs by plasmodesmata (of the plasma membrane’s inside).
Hong et al. (2014) reported absorption of CeO2 NPs via cucumber leaves and then its spread throughout plant tissues. According to Abd El-Azeim et al. (2020), NPK-containing nanofertilizers should be used topically rather than edaphically to increase potato yield. Application of silver NPs on leaves leads to its absorption and transportation by plant tissues of lettuce as stated by Larue et al. (2014).
3.2 Roots
Nanoparticles reach the xylem by penetrating the epidermis of the root. They travel through the xylem to the plant’s aerial components. They do so via pores in the cell wall having a size range between 3 to 8 nm (Zulfiqar et al. 2019; Rajput et al. 2020; Ali et al. 2021). The entry of NPs into roots can also be significantly influenced by the root tip meristems. NPs must break through cell walls and plasma membranes to enter the epidermal layers of roots and then they may go on to penetrate the vascular tissues (xylem).
Tomato roots were found to absorb gold NPs of 3.5 nm; however, they were unable to take in 18 nm NPs (Zulfiqar et al. 2019). Conventional fertilizers are known to pollute soil and water as much of the nutrients from the applied fertilizers are lost due to leaching. Furthermore, certain agricultural chemicals cause climate change by releasing greenhouse gases (Rochette et al. 2018). Torney et al. (2007) reported that the application of mesoporous silica NPs to the soil regulated the intracellular release of chemicals in protoplasts. Arabidopsis thaliana were reported to uptake spherical silica NPs (through roots) of size 14 to 200 nm (Slomberg and Schoenfisch 2012).
4 Agriculture and NPs
Agriculture is known as “economic backbone” of emerging nations as it supplies food for improved living conditions worldwide (Pouratashi and Iravani 2012; Mittal et al. 2020). Ever increasing population of our globe is anticipated to increase its food demand by approximately 70% in 2050 (Bindraban et al. 2018; Mandal and Lalrinchhani 2021). Therefore, to achieve global food security, it is essential to codify cutting-edge agriculture techniques with improved plant yield (Mandal and Lalrinchhani 2021). Due to their smaller size than bulk particles, nanoscale particles may well be absorbed with distinct dynamics, which has important advantages such as increased production, growth, and quality as given in Table 1. The utilization of nanofertilizers may increase the effectiveness of plants’ nutrient delivery (Chhipa 2017) due to the fact that nanofertilizers enable targeted distribution, slow release of nutrients, and reduce chemical use (Kah et al. 2019). The reduced size of nanofertilizers enhances their surface-mass ratio which allows more absorption of nutrients by roots.
5 Conventional Fertilizers Versus Nanofertilizers
There are copious methods of delivery of conventional fertilizers to the crops. They are generally applied either by sprinkling or dispersing. The ultimate concentration of the fertilizers reaching the crop, however, is one of the crucial criteria that determine the method of application. In a real-world scenario, losses through chemical leaching, washout, evaporation, hydrolyzed by soil moisture, and photolytic and microbiological breakdown result in concentrations that are significantly lower than the lowest intended concentration reaching the targeted site. According to reports, traditional fertilizers lose between 40 and 70% of their N, 80 to 90% of their P, and 50 to 90% of their K content before reaching the crop, causing long-term and significant economic losses (Ombodi and Saigusa 2000).
Chemical fertilizers and pesticides have caused these issues by being used repeatedly, which negatively impacts the soil’s natural nutritional balance (soil health). To reduce the danger of environmental damage, it is crucial to redesign the use of chemical (traditional) fertilization. Suitably, it may be advantageous to adopt alternative fertilizing techniques that can deliver essential nutrients for plant development and productivity while preserving the soil’s health and keeping a clean environment (Miransari 2011). Table 2 shows comparison of conventional fertilizers and nanotechnology based fertilizers.
6 Green Synthesis of NPs
6.1 Chemical Synthesis Versus Green Synthesis of NPs
The NPs are made utilizing a variety of techniques, including physical, chemical, and biological ones. Numerous physical and chemical processes, such as hydrothermal synthesis, sol–gel formulation, laser ablation, and lithography, need specialized tools and trained workers. Furthermore, these are hazardous to health and have toxic effects on environment (Iravani 2011; Darroudi et al. 2014). One of the most popular approaches is biological synthesis, often known as the biogenic or biomimetric pathway. High raw material availability, lower costs, low energy usage, and less health and environmental risks are a few benefits of green synthesis. Additionally, compared to complex (physical and chemical) approaches, infrastructural and chemical needs for biological processes are virtually nonexistent (Verma and Bharadvaja 2022).
6.2 Mechanism Behind Green Synthesis of NPs
Green nanomaterials can be produced using various biological routes such as plant-mediated, bacteria-mediated, actinomycetes-mediated, and fungi-mediated. Selecting an eco-friendly, affordable, and straightforward methodology is crucial given the large range of NP production processes available. Here, a thorough discussion of the generalized approach of synthesis of plant-mediated NPs is presented. The mechanism for green NP production is depicted in Fig. 2. The phytochemicals which are known to be present in the plant extracts (terpenes, quercetin, and phenolics) function as a reducing agent, converting metal precursors to metal NPs. These phytochemicals can serve as both reducing and stabilizing agents because they are antioxidants and non-toxic. These reducing agents (phytochemicals) are present in different concentration in different plant tissues. As a result, the composition of the leaf extract plays a crucial role in the creation of NPs (Mukunthan and Balaji 2012). After being reduced by plant extracts (Fig. 2), the metal ions undergo three steps of encapsulation as an organic coating for their stability. The first stage, known as the “activation phase,” entails metal ion reduction and decreased metal ion nucleation. The second phase is “growth phase” which brings about the stability of NPs and the third phase is the “termination phase” that consists of formation of NPs (Love et al. 2015). Through the action of phytochemicals, metals like Cu, Ag, Au, Ti, Zn, Fe, and Ni produce their metal oxides. The linking of metal ions and creation of a distinct shape are the final effects of the production of oxygen (Singh et al. 2018). X-ray diffractogram, energy dispersive spectrometry, and scanning electron microscope techniques are used to determine the size and form of the NPs.
6.3 Green NP Production Process
Five hundred milliliters of distilled water is combined with 10 g of the plant’s dry matter to create the plant extract. The resultant mixture is then heated to 90 °C on a thermal stirrer for 30 min. The solution obtained is passed through a fine filter (Whatman no. 1). To prepare any metal salt NPs say Zn, 1.83 g zinc acetate (molecular mass of zinc acetate), using an electric stirrer is dissolved in 100 ml of water and agitated for 10 min. Then, in 100 ml of plant extract, 100 ml of metal salt is mixed (for example, basil plant extract) and for 15 min, the resulting mixture is immersed in a hot water bath at around 60 °C. Likewise, to make green manufactured Cu, copper sulfate salt, is used and for Fe, iron sulfate is used (Abbasifar et al. 2020). The NPs produced by above method can be now used for crop production. Different NPs produced using plant extracts and the results obtained are depicted in Table 3.
7 Implications of NP Buildup on Soil Health
7.1 Effect of NPs on Biological Properties of Soil
It was shown that soil organic matter (SOM) adsorbs NPs easily, hence boosting their mobility in porous mediums and improving their stability in aqueous solutions (Xie et al. 2008; Johnson et al. 2009). According to the findings of Nyberg et al. (2008), fullerene NPs had minimal effect on the microbiota and their functions in soil. It has been confirmed that enzymatic activity and microbial biomass C and N in the soil are both decreased by multi-walled C nanotubes (Chung et al. 2011). Ge et al. (2011) evaluated the effects of ZnO and TiO2 on soil microbial communities and showed that these NPs inhibited microbial mass in soil and their diversification. According to research by Pradhan et al. (2011), exposure to CuO and AgNPs reduced the pace at which leaves decomposed due to microbial activity. Additionally, modifications to the microbial communities’ structure coincided with the decline in decomposition. Yang et al. (2009) revealed that humic substances’ carboxyl (− COOH) and phenolic hydroxyl (− OH) functional groups form sturdy complexes with TiO2NPs, altering the chemical compositions of humic substances. It was shown that AgNPs and Ag exhibited varying levels of toxicity on soil N-cycling microbes, including N fixing, nitrifying, and denitrifying bacteria (Yang et al. 2013).
Along with microbes, nematodes (ring worms) and earthworms are crucial for preserving the health of the soil. Studies that investigate the effects of NPs on nematodes are very rare and the majority of them concentrate upon the most well-known species of nematode, Caenorhabditis elegans (Starnes et al. 2019). For instance, Starnes et al. (2019) conducted an investigation on the toxicity of ZnONPs and their modified derivatives on C. elegans and discovered that both sulfidized and phosphatized ZnONPs exhibited reduced nematode toxicity than pure ZnONPs. Meloidogyne incognita, a parasitic worm that causes root knots, has been the subject of several investigations. To illustrate the potent nematocidal impact of AgNPs on M. incognita, tomato roots dipped in AgNPs before being exposed to the nematode exhibited significantly decreased infection (Kalaiselvi et al. 2019). Earthworms (Eisenia fetida) are important for the nutrient cycle and the production of soil aggregations (Blouin et al. 2013). Hu et al. (2010) investigated the effects of the NPs on cell structures of the earthworm, the organelles were analyzed using transmission electron microscopy (TEM). The internal layer of the gut’s cells included a lot of mitochondria (Fig. 3a). Some mitochondria had an aberrant appearance after being exposed to TiO2NPs and ZnONPs for a week, including breakage, disarray, and reduction or complete collapse of the cristae (Fig. 3b and c). They also discovered that after being exposed for a week in the soil to ZnONPs and TiO2NPs at a dosage of 5000 mg kg−1, the gut cell’s mitochondria were harmed. Additionally, they noted that ZnONPs were more harmful to earthworms and had a greater rate of bioaccumulation than TiO2NPs. According to several studies (Barua et al. 2013; Heckmann et al. 2011), there was no or very little fatalities in earthworms subjected to AgNPs disseminated in the soil. AgNPs, however, negatively impacted reproduction by influencing variables such cocoon creation, incubation rate, and avoidance (Heckmann et al. 2011).
7.2 Effect of NPs on Physical Properties of Soil
The influence of NPs on the physical characteristics of soil has not been extensively studied (Ben-Moshe et al. 2013). The surface of the individual (soil) grains has noticeably changed due to the NPs (Ben-Moshe et al. 2013). Also, with a 1% loading, the NPs were built up on the surface of the grains in massive aggregates (> 100 nm) and the aggregates’ NPs composition was verified by energy dispersive spectroscopy. Ben-Moshe et al. (2013) confirmed the reduced hydraulic conductivity and flow channel obstruction in the soil which may have resulted from the accumulation of NPs in the soil pores. In a separate research carried out by Nhallmark Bl (2017) , it was discovered that adding 6000 mg kg−1 of CeO2NPs to the soil through repeated watering cycles had no effect on soil porosity, but that it had an impact on how water was distributed among different pore sizes and how much water was accessible to plants.
7.3 Effect of NPs on Chemical Properties of Soil
As a crucial marker of soil chemical properties, soil cation exchange capacity (CEC) has a strong relationship to how well it can retain contaminants from the environment and nutrients for plants. According to De Souza et al. (2019), Fe3O4NPs boosted rhizosphere CEC in a study inside the greenhouse. According to Zhao et al. (2012a, b), ZnONPs have a great affinity for the colloids in soil. They have lower mobility over a range of ionic strengths and display greater sorption than ionic Zn2+. The capacity of soil to keep its aggregate structure amid drought conditions was enhanced by raising the shrinkage of kaolinite (Fig. 4) clay by 8–17% after mixing it with 6% CuONPs or Al2O3NPs (Coo et al. 2016). Conversely, their effect on clay shrinkage was not apparent when the dosage of NPs was decreased to 0.5%. Interactions between NPs clay and NPs SOM (Ben-Moshe et al. 2013) may affect how readily available heavy metals are in soil. The accumulation of CeO2NPs on the surface of 1:1 phyllosilicate mineral and kaolinite changed, its surface charge and for NPs to interact with clay, their surface charge is crucial (Sun et al. 2020). Elevated soluble Mg release was detected and was linked to soil CEC when 1–1000 mg kg−1 of TiO2NPs, CeO2NPs, or Cu(OH)2NPs were added to soil (Conway and Keller 2016). In a separate research, adding Mn2O3NPs at a dose of 6 mg kg−1 showed reduction in NPK content in wheat shoots. The identical NPs, however, administered by foliar treatment either had no impact or raised the amounts of NPK in wheat shoots, demonstrating that the NP exposure pathway influenced plant nutrient absorption (Dimkpa et al. 2018). ZnONPs sprayed on mung beans increased plant P concentrations by 11%when applied at 0.25 mg plant−1, and this increase was attributed to improved activities of P-solubilizing enzymes in soil which in turn would have increased the availability of P (Raliya et al. 2016).
8 Existing Deficits and Constraints
To realize the full potential of nanotechnology, there are still several obstacles that must be addressed. The challenges are dealt below.
8.1 Plant Cell Structure
Xylem and phloem embodies the main pathway for translocation of absorbed NPs (Li et al. 2016; Avellan et al. 2019). However, the capacity of various plant species to absorb, assimilate, and translocate NPs may vary. For instance, Cucurbita maxima was found to ingest a significant amount of NPs and disperse them into various plant tissues, but Phaseolus limensis was not reported to have any NPs under the same circumstances (Lv et al. 2019). According to certain studies, nanomaterials with higher surface charges than those with lower or neutral charges were able to enter plant cells or tissues' membranes more easily (Wong et al. 2016; Zhai et al. 2015). Nevertheless, nanomaterials must first cross the plant cell wall before accessing the cell membrane. According to reports, NPs with relatively high diameters (> 40 nm) may also readily cross the cellular membrane and enter the tissues of plants (Wang et al. 2016; Zhai et al. 2015; Demirer et al. 2019). Lanthanide NPs can be delivered, according to recent research, by turning on the plant endocytosis system (Wang et al. 2019). It is still necessary to investigate how additional nanomaterials may be used with the endocytosis process.
8.2 Nanomaterials’ Phytotoxicity
Nanoparticles may have a major reverberation on specific plants shortly after crossing plant cell walls or membranes; these effects can be either lethal or therapeutic (Peng et al. 2012; Yin et al. 2015; Zhang et al. 2012). Nanoparticles have repeatedly been observed to be poisonous to plants (Zou et al. 2016). Heavy metals present in NPs may dissolve, release, and even metabolically transformed after being absorbed by plants, causing phytotoxicity (Rastogi et al. 2017). In contrast to their bulk equivalents, certain NPs are said to be more variable and unstable in the plant environment. Their tiny size, high surface-to-volume ratio, and high reactivity might all be contributing factors (Lv et al. 2019). However, some “stable” NPs could transform to unstable ones after their application. For instance, nano CeO2 are often regarded to be stable (Zhao et al. 2012a, b); however, it has been discovered that they can be partially dissolved by the organic acids and chemicals the roots produce that are reducing in character (Lv et al. 2019; Zhang et al. 2012).
In addition, following transit, NP accumulation at the root surface or within plant parts may result in blockage and damage (Fig. 5) (Wang et al. 2016). They are also affected by the properties of growing media (Schlich and Hund-Rinke 2015). Different growth mediums (such as soil versus agar medium) interact with NPs differently, which might change their physical and chemical attributes and, as a result, their phytotoxicity (Zou et al. 2016). Fe3O4 NPs, for instance, were found to generate varying degrees of phytotoxicity in Cucurbita mixta plants cultivated in soil and sand (Zhu et al. 2008; Wang et al. 2011). Some growth medium characteristics, including pH, have enigmatic effects on NPs and may thus change their toxicity (Schlich and Hund-Rinke 2015; Yung et al. 2015). So, one emerging objective for NPs’ potential uses is to better understand NPs’ phytotoxicity and how they interact with the environment.
9 Conclusion and Future Prospects
The purpose of this review study was to offer some insight into the application of nanoparticles based nanofertilizers in agricultural production. Due to the pervasive nutrient deficit in agricultural soils, our findings, which are given here, indicate a decrease in crop output and significant economic losses in agriculture. Although providing nutrients with chemical fertilizers can lower economic losses by boosting agricultural output, its widespread usage is not a good long-term solution. As long as nanofertilizers are applied in specific concentrations and in accordance with crop requirements for minerals, they can be used as fertilizer carriers or controlled release vectors to create so-called “smart fertilizers” that improve nutrient use effectiveness and productivity without compromising the environment. The process of making desired nanoparticles from plants, or “biogenic synthesis,” offers several environmental advantages over traditional approaches. A well-known advantage is the wide variety of raw materials that are readily available and the straightforward processes for making plant-based nanoparticles. Both in vitro as well as in vivo approaches can be utilized to deliver nanoparticles to plants. Due to the increased scientific understanding of how natural processes in soil and plants are influenced, the deployment of nano-based fertilizers in agriculture has the potential to be beneficial.
However, as there is little knowledge about how nanoparticles are absorbed, transported, and ultimately disposed off in plant systems, there are currently a number of moral and health concerns arising from the use of nanofertilizers in agricultural output. Although nanofertilizers have had interesting results in the world of agriculture, their market value has not yet been the primary consideration in how they should be used. When nanoparticles are applied via their metal oxide, it is possible for poisonous metal ions to be released and to build up in the soil, endangering human health in the process by reducing the health of the soil and plants. Consequently, before nanoparticles/nanofertilizers are used commercially, their possible impacts on human health must be thoroughly studied. Additionally, nanoparticles/nanofertilizer deployment protection and the investigation of their toxicity must be research priorities. Prior to the implementation of the use of nanofertilizers, it is essential to study the ecotoxicity and defilement of nanoparticles in soil and define ecologically suitable dosages. In order to open up this new sector for sustainable agriculture, future research must concentrate on providing complete information in such uncharted territories.
Data Availability
Data sharing not applicable to this article as no datasets were generated or analysed during the current study.
Abbreviations
- 210 Po :
-
Polonium-210
- 232 Th :
-
Thorium-232
- 238 U :
-
Uranium-238
- Ag :
-
Silver
- Al 2 O 3 :
-
Aluminum oxide
- As :
-
Arsenic
- Au :
-
Gold
- C :
-
Carbon
- Cd :
-
Cadmium
- CeO 2 :
-
Cerium dioxide
- Cu :
-
Copper
- CuO :
-
Copper oxide
- Fe :
-
Iron
- Fe 3 O 4 :
-
Ferrous ferric oxide
- Hg :
-
Mercury
- K :
-
Potassium
- Mn :
-
Manganese
- Mn 2 O 3 :
-
Manganese(iii) oxide
- Mo :
-
Molybdenum
- N :
-
Nitrogen
- NP/NPs :
-
Nanoparticle/nanoparticles
- Ni :
-
Nickle
- P :
-
Phosphorous
- Pb :
-
Lead
- Si :
-
Silicon
- SOM :
-
Soil organic matter
- Ti :
-
Titanium
- TiO 2 :
-
Titanium dioxide
- Zn :
-
Zinc
- ZnO :
-
Zinc oxide
References
Ab dEL-Rahman MMA, Abd Elkarim NAA (2022) Effect of nano-N fertilizer on growth, fruiting and the fruits nutritive value of zaghloul date palm. SVU Int J Agric Sci 4:124–134. https://doi.org/10.21608/svuijas.2022.113803.1167
Abbasifar A, Shahrabadi F, ValizadehKaji B (2020) Effects of green synthesized zinc and copper nano-fertilizers on the morphological and biochemical attributes of basil plant. J Plant Nutr 8:1104–1118. https://doi.org/10.1080/01904167.2020.1724305
Abd El-Azeim MM, Sherif MA, Hussien MS, Tantawy IAA, Bashandy SO (2020) Impacts of nano and non-nanofertilizers on potato quality and productivity. Acta Ecol Sin 40:388–397. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chnaes.2019.12.007
Abd El-Ghany MF, El-Kherbawy MI, Abdel-Aal YA, El-Dek SI, El-Baky TA (2021) Comparative study between traditional and nano calcium phosphate fertilizers on growth and production of snap bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) plants. Nanomaterials 11. https://doi.org/10.3390/nano11112913
Abdelmigid HM, Hussien NA, Alyamani AA, Morsi MM, AlSufyani NM, Kadi HA (2020) Green synthesis of zinc oxide nanoparticles using pomegranate fruit peel and solid coffee grounds vs. chemical method of synthesis, with their biocompatibility and antibacterial properties investigation. Molecules 27:1–17. https://doi.org/10.3390/molecules27041236
Abdulhameed MF, Taha AA, Ismail RA (2021) Improvement of cabbage growth and yield by nanofertilizers and nanoparticles. Environ Nanotechnol Monit Manag 15:1–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enmm.2021.100437
Adrees M, Khan ZS, Ali S, Hafeez M, Khalid S, Rehman UR, Hussain MZA, Hussain K, Chatha SAS, Rizwan M (2020) Simultaneous mitigation of cadmium and drought stress in wheat by soil application of iron nanoparticles. Chemosphere 238:124681. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2019.124681
Ahmed MA, Abdelkader MAI (2020) Enhancing growth, yield components and chemical constituents of chilli (Capsicum annuum L.) plants by using different NPK fertilization levels and nano-micronutrients rates. Asian J Soil Sci 6:17–29. https://doi.org/10.9734/ajsspn/2020/v6i230083
Alhasan AS (2020) Effect of different npk nano-fertilizer rates on agronomic traits, essential oil, and seed yield of basil (Ocimum basilicum L. cv. Dolly) grown under field conditions. Plant Arch 20:2959–2962. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enmm.2021.100437
Ali S, Mehmood A, Khan N (2021) Uptake, translocation, and consequences of nanomaterials on plant growth and stress adaptation. J Nanomater 2021:1–17. https://doi.org/10.1155/2021/6677616
Alshaal T, Ramady H (2017) Foliar application: from plant nutrition to biofortification. Env Biodivers Soil Secur 1:71–83. https://doi.org/10.21608/jenvbs.2017.1089.1006
An J, Hu P, Li F, Wu H, Shen Y, White JC, Tian X, Li Z, Giraldo JP (2020) Emerging investigator series: molecular mechanisms of plant salinity stress tolerance improvement by seed priming with cerium oxide nanoparticles. Environ Sci: Nano 7:2214–2228. https://doi.org/10.1039/D0EN00387E
Avellan A, Yun J, Zhang Y, Spielman-Sun E, Unrine JM, Thieme J, Li J, Lombi E, Bland G, Lowry GV (2019) Nanoparticle size and coating chemistry control foliar uptake pathways, translocation and leaf-to-rhizosphere transport in wheat. ACS Nano 13:5291–5305. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsnano.8b09781
Barua S, Konwarh R, Bhattacharya SS, Das P, Sanjana K, Devi P, Maiti TK, Mandal M, Karak N (2013) Non-hazardous anticancerous and antibacterial colloidal “green” silver nanoparticles. Colloids Surf B 105:37–42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.colsurfb.2012.12.015
Basavegowda N, Baek KH (2021) Current and future perspectives on the use of nanofertilizers for sustainable agriculture: the case of phosphorus nanofertilizer. 3 Biotech 11:357. https://doi.org/10.10072Fs13205-021-02907-4
Bayat M, Zargar M, Astarkhanova T, Pakina E, Ladan S, Lyashko M, Shkurkin SI (2021) Facile biogenic synthesis and characterization of seven metal-based nanoparticles conjugated with phytochemical bioactives using Fragaria ananassa leaf extract. Molecules 26:1–24. https://doi.org/10.3390/molecules26103025
Ben-Moshe T, Frenk S, Dror I, Minz D, Berkowitz B (2013) Effects of metal oxide nanoparticles on soil properties. Chemosphere 90:640–646. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2012.09.018
Bindraban PS, Dimkpa CO, Angle S, Rabbinge R (2018) Unlocking the multiple public good services from balanced fertilizers. J Food Secur 10:273–285. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12571-018-0769-4
Blouin M, Hodson ME, Delgado EA, Baker G, Brussaard L, Butt KR, Dai J, Dendooven L, Peres G, Tondom JE, Cluzeau D, Brun JJ (2013) A review of earthworm impact on soil function and ecosystem service. Eur J Soil Sci 64:16177–16182. https://doi.org/10.1111/ejss.12025
Chhipa H (2017) Nanofertilizers and nanopesticides for agriculture. Environ Chem Lett 15:15–22. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10311-016-0600-4
Chhipa H, Joshi P (2016) Nanofertilisers, nanopesticides and nanosensors in agriculture. In: Ranjan S, Dasgupta N, Lichtfouse E. (ed) Nanoscience in food and agriculture 1. Sustainable Agriculture Reviews, vol 20. Springer, Cham, 247–282. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-39303-2_9
Chung H, Son Y, Yoon TK, Kim S, Kim W (2011) The effect of multi-walled carbon nanotubes on soil microbial activity. Ecotoxicol Environ Saf 74:569–575. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoenv.2011.01.004
Conley DJ, Paerl HW, Howarth RW, Boesch DF, Seitzinger SP, Havens KE (2009) Controlling eutrophication: nitrogen and phosphorus. Science 323:1014–1015. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1167755
Conway JR, Keller AA (2016) Gravity-driven transport of three engineered nanomaterials in unsaturated soils and their effects on soil pH and nutrient release. Water Res 98:250–260. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.watres.2016.04.021
Coo JL, So ZP, Ng CW (2016) Effect of nanoparticles on the shrinkage properties of clay. Eng Geol 213:84–88. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enggeo.2016.09.001
Dai Y, Chen F, Yue L, Li T, Jiang Z, Xu Z, Wang Z, Xing B (2020) Uptake, transport, and transformation of CeO2 nanoparticles by strawberry and their impact on the rhizosphere bacterial community. ACS Sustain Chem Eng 8:4792–4800. https://doi.org/10.1021/acssuschemeng.1c04987
Darroudi M, Sabouri Z, Oskuee RK, Zak AK, Kargar H, Hamid MH (2014) Green chemistry approach for the synthesis of ZnO nanopowders and their cytotoxic effects. Ceram Int 40:4827–4831. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ceramint.2013.09.032
De Souza A, Govea-Alcaide E, Masunaga SH, Fajardo-Rosabal L, Effenberger F, Rossi LM, Jardim RF (2019) Impact of Fe3O4 nanoparticle on nutrient accumulation in common bean plants grown in soil. SN Appl Sci 1:308. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42452-019-0321-y
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 Nanotechnol 14:456–464. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41565-019-0382-5
Dimkpa C, Singh U, Adisa I, Bindraban P, Elmer W, Gardea-Torresdey J, White J (2018) Effects of manganese nanoparticle exposure on nutrient acquisition in wheat (Triticum aestivum L.). Agronomy 8:158. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy8090158
Dutta T, Ghosh NN, Das M, Adhikary R, Mandal V, Chattopadhyay AP (2020) Green synthesis of antibacterial and antifungal silver nanoparticles using Citrus limetta peel extract: experimental and theoretical studies. J Environ Chem Eng 8:104019. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jece.2020.104019
El-Desouky HS, Islam KR, Bergefurd B, Gao G, Harker T, Abd-El-Dayem IF, Mohamed M, Zewail MY (2021) Nano iron fertilization significantly increases tomato yield by increasing plants vegetable growth and photosynthetic efficiency. J Plant Nutr 44:1649–1663. https://doi.org/10.1080/01904167.2021.1871749
El-Saadony MT, El-Wafai NA, El-Fattah HIA, Mahgoub SA (2019) Biosynthesis, optimization and characterization of silver nanoparticles using a soil isolate of Bacillus pseudomycoides MT32 and their antifungal activity against some pathogenic fungi. Adv Anim Vet Sci 7:238–249. https://doi.org/10.17582/journal.aavs/2019/7.4.238.249
El-Saadony MT, El-Hack A, Mohamed E, Taha AE, Fouda MM, Ajarem JS, Maodaa NS, Allam AA, Elshaer N (2020) Ecofriendly synthesis and insecticidal application of copper nanoparticles against the storage pest Tribolium castaneum. Nanomaterials 10:587. https://doi.org/10.3390/nano10030587
Elsheery NI, Helaly MN, El-Hoseiny HM, Alam-Eldein SM (2020) Zinc oxide and silicone nanoparticles to improve the resistance mechanism and annual productivity of salt-stressed mango trees. Agronomy 10:558. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy10040558
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. https://doi.org/10.4161/psb.1.4.3142
FAOSTAT (2022) Food and Agriculture Organization of United Nations, Rome, Italy. Available via https://www.fao.org/faostat/en/#data/RFN
Faraji J, Sepehri A (2020) Exogenous nitric oxide improves the protective effects of TiO2 nanoparticles on growth, antioxidant system, and photosynthetic performance of wheat seedlings under drought stress. J Soil Sci Plant Nutr 20:703–714. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42729-019-00158-0
Fertilizer Association of India (FAI) (2021) In: Annual review of fertilizer production and consumption. 931.
Fleischer MA, O’Neill R, Ehwald R (1999) The pore size of non-graminaceous plant cell walls is rapidly decreased by borate ester cross-linking of the pectic polysaccharide rhamnogalacturonan II. Plant Physiol 121:829–838. https://doi.org/10.1104/pp.121.3.829
Fox JP, Capen JD, Zhang W, Ma X, Rossi L (2020) Effects of cerium oxide nanoparticles and cadmium on corn (Zea mays L.) seedlings physiology and root anatomy. NanoImpact 20. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.impact.2020.100264
Ge Y, Schimel JP, Holden PA (2011) Evidence for negative effects of TiO2 and ZnO nanoparticles on soil bacterial communities. Environ Sci Technol 45:1659–1664. https://doi.org/10.1021/es103040t
Ghafariyan MH, Malakouti MJ, Dadpour MR, Stroeve P, Mahmoudi M (2013) Effects of magnetite nanoparticles on soybean chlorophyll. Environ Sci Technol 47:10645–10652. https://doi.org/10.1021/es402249b
Ghosh SK, Bera T (2021) 22 - Molecular mechanism of nano-fertilizer in plant growth and development: a recent account. In: Jogaiah S, Singh HB, Fraceto LF, Lima RD (ed) Advances in nano-fertilizers and nano-pesticides in agriculture: a smart delivery system for crop improvement, Woodhead Publishing 535–560. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-820092-6.00022-7
Gohari G, Mohammadi A, Akbari A (2020) Titanium dioxide nanoparticles (TiO2 NPs) promote growth and ameliorate salinity stress effects on essential oil profile and biochemical attributes of Dracocephalum moldavica. Sci Rep 10:912. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-57794-1
Gomez A, Narayan M, Zhao L, Jia X, Bernal RA, Lopez-Moreno ML, Peralta-Videa JR (2021) Effects of nano-enabled agricultural strategies on food quality: current knowledge and future research needs. J Hard Mater 401:123385. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2020.123385
Grangah MF, Rashidi V, Mirshekari B, Behrouzyar EK, Farahvash F (2020) Effects of nano-fertilizers on physiological and yield characteristics of pinto bean cultivars under water deficit stress. J Plant Nutr 43:2898–2910. https://doi.org/10.1080/01904167.2020.1799000
Guru T, Veronica N, Thatikunt R, Reddy SN (2015) Crop nutrition management with nano fertilizers. Int J Environ Sci Technol 1:4–6
Ha NM, Nguyen TH, Wang SL, Nguyen AD (2019) Preparation of NPK nanofertilizer based on chitosan nanoparticles and its effect on biophysical characteristics and growth of coffee in green house. Res Chem Intermed 45:51–63. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11164-018-3630-7
Heckmann LH, Hovgaard MB, Sutherland DS, Autrup H, Besenbacher F, Scott-Fordsmand JJ (2011) Limit-test toxicity screening of selected inorganic nanoparticles to the earthworm (Eisenia fetida). Ecotoxicology 20:226–233. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10646-010-0574-0
Hemdan NA, Mohamed M, Hussein M, El-Ashry S (2020) Conventional and nano fertilizers and its effect on growth and nutrient status of lupine plants. Curr Sci Int 9:698–705. https://doi.org/10.36632/csi/2020.9.4.63
Herrera J, Rubio G, Heaner L, Delgado J, Lucho-Constantino C, Islas-Valdez S, Pellet D (2016) Emerging and established technologies to increase nitrogen use efficiency of cereals. Agronomy 6:25. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy6020025
Hong J, Peralta-Videa JR, Rico CM, Sahi SV, Viveros MN, Bartonjo J (2014) Evidence of translocation and physiological impacts of foliar applied CeO2 nanoparticles on cucumber (Cucumis sativus) plants. Environ Sci Technol 48:4376–4385. https://doi.org/10.1021/es404931g
Hu CW, Li M, Cui Y, Li D, Chen J, Yang L (2010) Toxicological effects of TiO2 and ZnO nanoparticles in soil on earthworm Eisenia fetida. Soil Biol Biochem 42:586–591. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.SOILBIO.2009.12.007
Hussein HS, Shaarawy HH, Hussien NH et al (2020) Preparation of nano-fertilizer blend from banana peels. Bull Natl Res Cent 43:2–9. https://doi.org/10.1186/s42269-019-0058-1
Iravani S (2011) Green synthesis of metal nanoparticles using plants. Green Chem 13:2638–2650. https://doi.org/10.1039/C1GC15386B
Irshad MA, Nawaz R, Rehman M, Imran M, Ahmad MJ, Ahmad S, Inaam A, Razzaq A, Rizwan, M, Ali S (2020) Synthesis and characterization of titanium dioxide nanoparticles by chemical and green methods and their antifungal activities against wheat rust. Chemosphere 258. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2020.127352
Jia C, Lu P, Zhang M (2020) Preparation and characterization of environmentally friendly controlled release fertilizers coated by leftovers based polymer. Processes 8:417. https://doi.org/10.3390/pr8040417
Johnson RL, Johnson GOB, Nurmi JT, Tratnyek PG (2009) Natural organic matter enhanced mobility of nano zerovalent iron. Environ Sci Technol 43:5455–5460. https://doi.org/10.1021/es900474f
Juthery S (2019) The Effect of fertigation with nano NPK fertilizers on some parameters of growth and yield of potato (Solanum tuberosum L.). Al-Qadisiyah J Agric Sci 9:225–232. https://doi.org/10.33794/qjas.2019.167061
Kah M, Tufenkji N, White JC (2019) Nano-enabled strategies to enhance crop nutrition and protection. Nat Nanotechnol 14:532–540. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41565-019-0439-5
Kalaiselvi D, Mohankumar A, Shanmugam G, Nivitha S, Sundararaj P (2019) Green synthesis of silver nanoparticles using latex extract of Euphorbia tirucalli: a novel approach for the management of root knot nematode, Meloidogyne incognita. Crop Prot 117:108–114. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cropro.2018.11.020
Khalid U, Sher F, Noreen S, Lima EC, Rasheed T, Sehar S, Amami R (2022) Comparative effects of conventional and nano-enabled fertilizers on morphological and physiological attributes of Caesalpinia bonducella plants. J Saudi Soc Agric Sci 21:61–72. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jssas.2021.06.011
Khodair ZT, Ibrahim NM, Khadim TJ, Mohammad AM (2022) Synthesis and characterization of nickel oxide (NiO) nanoparticles using an environmentally friendly method and their biomedical application. Chem Phys Lett 797. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cplett.2022.139564
Khorami AM, Sinaki JM, Dehaghi MA, Rezvan S, Damavandi A (2020) Sesame (Sesame indicum L.) biochemical and physiological responses as affected by applying chemical, biological, and nano-fertilizers in field water stress conditions. J Plant Nutr 43:456–475. https://doi.org/10.1080/01904167.2019.1683189
Kokina I, Plaksenkova I, Jermaļonoka M, Petrova A (2020) Impact of iron oxide nanoparticles on yellow medick (Medicago falcata L.) plants. J Plant Interact 15:1–7. https://doi.org/10.1080/17429145.2019.1708489
Larue C, Castillo MH, Sobanska S, Cécillon L, Bureau S, Barthes V (2014) Foliar exposure of the crop (Lactuca sativa) to silver nanoparticles: evidence for internalization and changes in Ag speciation. J Hazard Mater 264:98–106. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2013.10.053
Li W, Zheng Y, Zhang H, Liu Z, Su W, Chen S, Liu Y, Zhuang J, Lei B (2016) Phytotoxicity, uptake and translocation of fluorescent carbon dots in mung bean plants. ACS Appl Mater Interfaces 8:19939–19945. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsami.6b07268
Li Y, Zhu N, Liang X, Bai X, Zheng L, Zhao J, Li YF, Zhang Z, Gao Y (2020) Silica nanoparticles alleviate mercury toxicity via immobilization and inactivation of Hg(II) in soybean (Glycine max). Environ Sci Nano 7:1807–1817. https://doi.org/10.1039/D0EN00091D
Liu R, Lal R (2016) Nanofertilizers. In: Encyclopedia of soil science, 3rd edn. CRC Press, Boca Raton. 1511–1515. https://doi.org/10.1081/E-ESS3-120053199
Love AJ, Makarov VV, Sinitsyna OV, Shaw J, Yaminsky IV, Kalinina NO, Taliansky MA (2015) Genetically modified tobacco mosaic virus that can produce gold nanoparticles from a metal salt precursor. Front Plant Sci 6:984. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2015.00984
Lv J, Christie P, Zhang S (2019) Uptake, translocation and transformation of metal-based nanoparticles in plants: recent advances and methodological challenges. Environ Sci Nano 6:41–59. https://doi.org/10.1039/C8EN00645H
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 1-7https://doi.org/10.1155/2011/696535
Mandal D, Lalrinchhani (2021) Nanofertilizer and its application in horticulture. J Appl Hortic 23:70–77. https://doi.org/10.37855/jah.2021.v23i01.14
Mastronardi E, Tsae P, Zhang X, Monreal C, DeRosa MC (2015) Strategic role of nanotechnology in fertilizers: potential and limitations. In: Rai M, Ribeiro C, Mattoso L and Duran N. (eds) Nanotechnologies in food and agriculture. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-14024-7_2
Mathew SS, Sunny NE, Shanmugam V (2020) Green synthesis of anatase titanium dioxide nanoparticles using Cuminum cyminum seed extract; effect on Mung bean (Vigna radiata) seed germination. Inorg Chem Commun 126:1–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.inoche.2021.108485
Meena RH, Jat G, Jain D (2021) Impact of foliar application of different nano-fertilizers on soil microbial properties and yield of wheat. J Environ Biol 42:302–08. https://doi.org/10.22438/jeb/42/2/MRN-1465
Miransari M (2011) Soil microbes and plant fertilization. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 92:875–885. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00253-011-3521-y
Mittal D, Kaur G, Singh P, Yadav K, Ali SA (2020) Nanoparticle-based sustainable agriculture and food science: recent advances and future outlook. Front Nanosci 2:10. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnano.2020.579954
Moradbeygi H, Jamei R, Heidari R, Darvishzadeh R (2020) Investigating the enzymatic and non-enzymatic antioxidant defense by applying iron oxide nanoparticles in Dracocephalum moldavica L. plant under salinity stress. Sci Hortic 272:109537. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scienta.2020.109537
Mukunthan KS, Balaji S (2012) Cashew apple juice (Anacardium occidentale L.) speeds up the synthesis of silver nanoparticles. Int J Green Nanotechnol 4:71–79. https://doi.org/10.1080/19430892.2012.676900
Nekrasova GF, Ushakova OS, Ermakov AE, Uimin MA, Byzov IV (2011) Effects of copper (II) ions and copper oxide nanoparticles on Elodea densa Planch. Russ J Econ 42:458. https://doi.org/10.1134/S1067413611060117
nHallmark BL (2017) Impact of CeO2 Nanoparticles and sodium chloride (NaCl) on soil water potential and distribution (M.S. thesis). Texas A and M University. https://hdl.handle.net/1969.1/165791
Nilavukkarasi S, Vijayakumar S, Prathip K (2020) Capparis zeylanica mediated bio-synthesized ZnO nanoparticles as antimicrobial, photocatalytic and anti-cancer applications. Mater Sci Technol 3:335–343. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mset.2020.02.008
Nyberg L, Turco RF, Nies L (2008) Assessing the impact of nanomaterials on anaerobic microbial communities. Environ Sci Technol 42:1938–1943. https://doi.org/10.1021/es072018g
Ombodi A, Saigusa M (2000) Broadcast application versus band application of polyolefin-coated fertilizer on green peppers grown on andisol. J Plant Nutr 23:1485–1493. https://doi.org/10.1080/01904160009382116
Osman SA, Salama DM, Abd El-Aziz ME, Shaaban EA, AbdElwahed MS (2020) The influence of MoO3-NPs on agro-morphological criteria, genomic stability of DNA, biochemical assay, and production of common dry bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.). Plant Physiol Biochem 151:77–87. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.plaphy.2020.03.009
Ostadia A, Javanmarda A, Machiania MA, Morshedloob MR, Nouraeina M, Rasoulib F, Maggic F (2020) Effect of different fertilizer sources and harvesting time on the growth characteristics, nutrient uptakes, essential oil productivity and composition of Mentha x piperita L. Ind Crops Prod 148:1–11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indcrop.2020.112290
Panda J, Nandi A, Mishra SP, Pal AK, Pattnaik AK, Jena NK (2020) Effects of nano fertilizer on yield, yield attributes and economics in tomato (Solanum lycopersicum L.). Int J Curr Microbiol Appl Sci 9:2583–2591. https://doi.org/10.20546/ijcmas.2020.905.295
Peng J, Sun Y, Liu Q, Yang Y, Zhou J, Feng W, Zhang X, Li F (2012) Upconversion nanoparticles dramatically promote plant growth without toxicity. Nano Res 5:770–782. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12274-012-0261-y
Perez Velasco EA, Betancourt Galindo R, Valdez Aguilar LA, Gonzalez Fuentes JA, Puente Urbina BA, Lozano Morales SA, Sanchez Valdes S (2020) Effects of the morphology, surface modification and application methods of ZnO-NPs on the growth and biomass of tomato plants. Molecules 25:1282. https://doi.org/10.3390/molecules25061282
Pouratashi M, Iravani H (2012) Farmers’ knowledge of integrated pest management and learning style preferences: implications for information delivery. Int J Pest Manag 58:347–353. https://doi.org/10.1080/09670874.2012.724468
Pradhan A, Seena S, Pascoal C, Cassio F (2011) Can metal nanoparticles be a threat to microbial decomposers of plant litter in streams? Microb Ecol 62:58–68. https://www.jstor.org/stable/41489763
Pradhan S, Patra P, Das S, Chandra S, Mitra S, Dey KK, Goswami A (2013) Photochemical modulation of biosafe manganese nanoparticles on Vigna radiata: a detailed molecular, biochemical, and biophysical study. Environ Sci Technol 47:13122–13131. https://doi.org/10.1021/es402659t
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
Rajput V, Minkina T, Mazarji M, Shend S, Sushkova S, Mandzhieva S (2020) Accumulation of nanoparticles in the soil-plant systems and their effects on human health. Ann Agric Sci 65:137–143. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aoas.2020.08.001
Raliya R, Tarafdar JC, Biswas P (2016) Enhancing the mobilization of native phosphorus in the mung bean rhizosphere using ZnO nanoparticles synthesized by soil fungi. J Agric Food Chem 64:3111–3118. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy8090158
Ramesh P, Saravanan K, Manogar P, Johnson J, Vinoth E, Mayakannan M (2021) Green synthesis and characterization of biocompatible zinc oxide nanoparticles and evaluation of its antibacterial potential. Sens Bio-Sens Res. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbsr.2021.100399
Rameshaiah GN, Pallavi J, Shabnam S (2015) Nano fertilizers and nano sensors–an attempt for developing smart agriculture. Int J Eng Res Gen Sci 3:314–320
Rastogi A, Zivcak M, Sytar O, Kalaji HM, He X, Mbarki S, Brestic M (2017) Impact of metal and metal oxide nanoparticles on plant: a critical review. Front Chem 5:78. https://doi.org/10.3389/fchem.2017.00078
Rathod VT (2020) Application of nanocomposite materials and nanofertilizer. J Emerg Technol Innov Res 7:1151–1154. https://www.jetir.org/papers/JETIR2012146.pdf
Reda FM, El-Saadony MT, El-Rayes TK, Attia AI, El-Sayed SA, Ahmed SY, Madkour M, Alagawany M (2021) Use of biological nano zinc as a feed additive in quail nutrition: biosynthesis, antimicrobial activity and its effect on growth, feed utilization, blood metabolites and intestinal microbiota. Ital J Anim Sci 20:324–335. https://doi.org/10.1080/1828051X.2021.1886001
Rochette P, Liang C, Pelster D, Bergeron O, Lemke R, Kroebel R (2018) Soil nitrous oxide emissions from agricultural soils in Canada: exploring relationships with soil, crop and climatic variables. Agric Ecosyst Environ 254:69–81. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2017.10.021
Salama DM, Abd El-Aziz ME, Rizk FA, Abd Elwahed MSA (2021) Applications of nanotechnology on vegetable crops. Chemosphere 266:1–47. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2020.129026
Samaj J, Baluska F, Voigt B, Schlicht M, Volkmann D, Menzel D (2004) Endocytosis, actin cytoskeleton, and signalling. Plant Physiol 135:1150–1161. https://doi.org/10.1104/pp.104.040683
Sarkar J, Chakraborty N, Chatterjee A, Bhattacharjee A, Dasgupta D, Acharya K (2020) Green synthesized copper oxide nanoparticles ameliorate defence and antioxidant enzymes in Lens culinaris. Nanomaterials 10:312. https://doi.org/10.3390/nano10020312
Savci S (2012) Investigation of effect of chemical fertilizers on environment. APCBEE Proc 1:287–292. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apcbee.2012.03.047
Schlich K, Hund-Rinke K (2015) Influence of soil properties on the effect of silver nanomaterials on microbial activity in five soils. Environ Pollut 196:321–330. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2014.10.021
Schwab F, Zhai GS, Kern M, Turner A, Schnoor JL, Wiesner MR (2016) Barriers, pathways and processes for uptake, translocation and accumulation of nanomaterials in plants: critical review. Nanotoxicology 10:257–278. https://doi.org/10.3109/17435390.2015.1048326
Seleiman MF, Almutairi KF, Alotaibi SA, Alhammad BA, Battaglia ML (2021) Nano-fertilization as an emerging fertilization technique: why can modern agriculture benefit from its use. Plants 10:2. https://doi.org/10.3390/plants10010002
Shang Y, Hasan K, Ahammed GJ, Li M, Yin H (2019) Application of nanotechnology in plant growth and crop protection: a review. Molecules 24. https://doi.org/10.3390/molecules24142558
Sharma S, Rana VS, Pawar R, Lakra J, Racchapannavar VK (2020) Nanofertilizers for sustainable fruit production: a review. Environ Chem Lett 19:1693–1714. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10311-020-01125-3
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 Nanobiotechnology 16:1–24. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12951-018-0408-4
Slomberg DL, Schoenfisch MH (2012) Silica nanoparticle phytotoxicity to Arabidopsis thaliana. Environ Sci Technol 46:10247–10254. https://doi.org/10.1021/es300949f
Sonmez O, Kaplan M, Sönmez S (2007) An investigation of seasonal changes in nitrate contents of soils and irrigation waters in greenhouses located in Antalya-Demre region. Asian J Chem 19:5639–5646
Starnes D, Unrine J, Chen C, Lichtenberg S, Starnes C, Svendsen C, Peter K, Morgan J, Zeinah EB, Amanda S, Bertsch P, Chen KC, Tsyuskoa O (2019) Toxicogenomic responses of Caenorhabditis elegans to pristine and transformed zinc oxide nanoparticles. Environ Pollut 247:917–926. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2019.01.077
Sun W, Dou F, Li C, Ma X, Ma LQ (2020) Impacts of metallic nanoparticles and transformed products on soil health. Crit Rev Environ Sci Technol 51:973–1002. https://doi.org/10.1080/10643389.2020.1740546
Suresh J, Pradheesh G, Alexramani V, Sundrarajan M, Hong SI (2018) Green synthesis and characterization of zinc oxide nanoparticle using insulin plant (Costus pictus) and investigation of its antimicrobial as well as anticancer activities. Adv Nat Sci: Nanosci Nanotechnol 9:1–8. https://doi.org/10.1088/2043-6254/aaa6f1
Taha RA, Hassan MM, Ibrahim EA, Abou Baker NH, Shaaban EA (2016) Carbon nanotubes impact on date palm in vitro cultures. Plant Cell, Tissue Organ Cult 127:525–534. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11240-016-1058-6
Tamilarasi P, Meena P (2020) Green synthesis of silver nanoparticles (Ag NPs) using Gomphrena globosa (Globe amaranth) leaf extract and their characterization. Mater Today: Proc 33:2209–2216. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2020.04.025
Tanha EY, Fallaha S, Rostamnejadi A, Pokhrel LR (2020) Zinc oxide nanoparticles (ZnONPs) as a novel nanofertilizer: influence on seed yield and antioxidant defense system in soil grown soybean (Glycine max cv. Kowsar). Sci Total Environ. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.140240
Torney F, Trewyn BG, Lin VSY, Wang K (2007) Mesoporous silica nanoparticles deliver DNA and chemicals into plants. Nat Nanotechnol 2:295–300. https://doi.org/10.1038/nnano.2007.108
Trenkel ME (2010) Slow-and controlled-release and stabilized fertilizers: an option for enhancing nutrient use efficiency in agriculture. International Fertilizer Industry Association, (IFA), Paris, France, 1–163
Trobisch S, Schilling G (1970) Contribution to the clarification of the physiological foundations of seed formation in annual plants and to the effect of additional N-additions to this process on the example of Sinapis alba L. Arch Agron Soil Sci 14:253–265
Valojai ST, Niknejad Y, Amoli HF, Tari DB (2021) Response of rice yield and quality to nanofertilizers in comparison with conventional fertilizers. J Plant Nutr 44:1971–1981. https://doi.org/10.1080/01904167.2021.1884701
Verma A, Bharadvaja N (2022) Plant-mediated synthesis and characterization of silver and copper oxide nanoparticles: antibacterial and heavy metal removal activity. J Clust Sci 33:1697–1712. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10876-021-02091-8
Vijayakumar S, Vinayagam R, Anand MAV, Venkatachalam K, Saravanakumar K, Wang MH, Casimeer CS, Km G, David E (2020) Green synthesis of gold nanoparticle using Eclipta alba and its antidiabetic activities through regulation of Bcl-2 expression in pancreatic cell line. J Drug Deliv Sci Technol 58:101786. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jddst.2020.101786
Vishekaii ZR, Soleimani A, Fallahi E, Hasani A, Ghasemnezhad M (2022) Response of olive (Olea europaea L.) trees to foliar spray of nano chelated and chemical potassium fertilizers. J Plant Nutr 29. https://doi.org/10.1080/01904167.2022.2072740
Wang H, Kou X, Pei Z, Xiao JQ, Shan X, Xing B (2011) Physiological effects of magnetite (Fe3O4) nanoparticles on perennial ryegrass (Lolium perenne L.) and pumpkin (Cucurbita mixta) plants. Nanotoxicology 5:30–42. https://doi.org/10.3109/17435390.2010.489206
Wang P, Lombi E, Zhao FJ, Kopittke PM (2016) Nanotechnology: a new opportunity in plant sciences. Trends Plant Sci 21:699–712. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tplants.2016.04.005
Wang L, Cheng M, Yang Q, Li Z, Wang X, Zhou Q, Nagawa S, Xia B, Xu T, Huang R, He J, Li C, Fu Y, Liu Y, Bao J, Wei H, Li H, Tan L, Gu Z, Xia A, Huang X, Yang Z, Deng XW (2019) Arabinogalactan protein–rare earth element complexes activate plant endocytosis. Proc Natl Acad Sci 116:14349–14357. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1902532116
Wang Y, Deng C, Cota-Ruiz K, Peralta-Videa JR, Sun Y, Rawat S, Tan W, Reyes A, Hernandez-Viezcas JA, Niu G, Li C, Gardea-Torresdey JL (2020) Improvement of nutrient elements and allicin content in green onion (Allium fistulosum) plants exposed to CuO nanoparticles. Sci Total Environ 725:138387. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.138387
Weber NC, Koron D, Jakopic J, Veberic R, Hudina M, Cesnik HB (2021) Influence of nitrogen, calcium and nano-fertilizer on strawberry (Fragaria × ananassa Duch.) fruit inner and outer quality. Agronomy 11:997. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy11050997
Wong MH, Misra RP, Giraldo JP, Kwak SY, Son Y, Landry MP, Swan JW, Blankschtein D, Strano MS (2016) Lipid exchange envelope penetration (LEEP) of nanoparticles for plant engineering: a universal localization mechanism. Nano Lett 16:1161–1172. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.nanolett.5b04467
Xie B, Xu Z, Guo W, Li Q (2008) Impact of natural organic matter on the physicochemical properties of aqueous C60 nanoparticles. Environ Sci Technol 42:2853–2859. https://doi.org/10.1021/es702231g
Yang K, Lin D, Xing B (2009) Interactions of humic acid with nanosized inorganic oxides. Langmuir 25:3571–3576. https://doi.org/10.1021/la803701b
Yang Y, Wang J, Xiu Z, Alvarez PJ (2013) Impacts of silver nanoparticles on cellular and transcriptional activity of nitrogen-cycling bacteria. Environ Toxicol Chem 32:1488–1494. https://doi.org/10.1002/etc.2230
Yin W, Zhou L, Ma Y, Tian G, Zhao J, Yan L, Zheng X, Zhang P, Yu J, Gu Z, Zhao Y (2015) Phytotoxicity, translocation and biotransformation of NaYF4 upconversion nanoparticles in a soybean plant. Small 11:4774–4784. https://doi.org/10.1002/smll.201500701
Yung MM, Wong SW, Kwok KW, Liu F, Leung Y, Chan W, Li X, Djurisic A, Leung KM (2015) Salinity dependent toxicities of zinc oxide nanoparticles to the marine diatom Thalassiosira pseudonana. Aquat Toxicol 165:31–40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aquatox.2015.05.015
Zhai G, Gutowski SM, Walters KS, Yan B, Schnoor JL (2015) Charge, size and cellular selectivity for multiwall carbon nanotubes by maize and soybean. Environ Sci Technol 49:7380–7390. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.5b01145
Zhang P, Ma Y, Zhang Z, He X, Zhang J, Guo Z, Tai R, Zhao Y, Chai Z (2012) Biotransformation of ceria nanoparticles in cucumber plants. ACS Nano 6:9943–9950. https://doi.org/10.1021/nn303543n
Zhang X, Davidson EA, Mauzerall DL, Searchinger TD, Dumas P, Shen Y (2015) Managing nitrogen for sustainable development. Nature 528:51–59. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature15743
Zhao L, Peralta-Videa JR, Ren M, Varela-Ramirez A, Li C, Hernandez-Viezcas JA, Aguilera RJ, Gardea-Torresdey JL (2012a) Transport of Zn in a sandy loam soil treated with ZnO NPs and uptake by corn plants: electron microprobe and confocal microscopy studies. Chem Eng J 184:1–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cej.2012.01.041
Zhao L, Peralta-Videa JR, Varela-Ramirez A, Castillo-Michel H, Li C, Zhang J, Aguilera RJ, Keller AA, Gardea-Torresdey JL (2012b) Effect of surface coating and organic matter on the uptake of CeO2 NPs by corn plants grown in soil: insight into the uptake mechanism. J Hazard Mater 225–226:131–138. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2012.05.008
Zhao Y, Bai C, Brinker CJ, Chi L, Dawson KA, Gogotsi Y, Halas NJ, Lee ST, Lee T, Liz-Marzan L, Miller JF, Mitra S, Nel AE, Nordlander P, Parak WJ, Rowan A, Rogach AL, Rotello VM, Tang BZ, Wee AT (2019) Nano as a rosetta stone: The global roles and opportunities for nanoscience and nanotechnology. ACS Nano 13:10853–10855. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsnano.9b08042
Zhu H, Han J, Xiao JQ, Jin Y (2008) Uptake, translocation, and accumulation of manufactured iron oxide nanoparticles by pumpkin plants. J Environ Monit 10:713–717. https://doi.org/10.1039/b805998e
Zou X, Li P, Huang Q, Zhang H (2016) The different response mechanisms of Wolffia globosa: light-induced silver nanoparticle toxicity. Aquat Toxicol 176:97–105. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aquatox.2016.04.019
Zulfiqar F, Navarro M, Ashraf M, Akram N, Munne-Bosch S (2019) Nanofertilizer use for sustainable agriculture: advantages and limitations. Plant Sci 289:110270. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.plantsci.2019.110270
Acknowledgements
We thank Er. Nivesh Loshali (Instrumentation and control Engineer, Infosys Ltd.) for assisting with understanding the technical aspects of the topic.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Competing Interests
The authors declare no competing interests.
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.
About this article
Cite this article
Negi, M., Sharma, S., Sharma, U. et al. Aspects of the Current and Prospective Sustainable Usage of Nanofertilizers in Agriculture and Their Effects on Health of the Soil: an Updated Review. J Soil Sci Plant Nutr 23, 594–611 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s42729-022-01068-4
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s42729-022-01068-4