Take a look at the Recent articles

Effect of accumulation of nanoparticles in soil health- a concern on future

Zoya Javed

Research Scholar, Center for Rural development and technology, IIT Delhi, India

Kavya Dashora

Assistant Professor, Center for Rural development and technology, IIT Delhi, India

Mansi Mishra

Research Scholar, Center for Rural development and technology, IIT Delhi, India

Vinayak D. Fasake

Research Scholar, Center for Rural development and technology, IIT Delhi, India

Ayushi Srivastva

Research Scholar, Center for Rural development and technology, IIT Delhi, India

DOI: 10.15761/FNN.1000182

Article
Article Info
Author Info
Figures & Data

Abstract

Nanotechnology proved as a boon to this era and is widely applied in many areas of science and technology. Agriculture is the backbone of industrial raw material and it is very important to have technologies supporting high yield, better crop production and protection in a cost effective, ecofriendly and sustainable way. Globally, there is a lot of research being conducted in the field of application of nanoparticles in agriculture. In recent time nano-based materials like nanoparticles and nanoformulations, nano-based fertilizers, nano-pesticides and insecticides, nano fungicides and other plant disease control formulations are available in the market. Though this technology offers many advantages, yet there are some vices which is causing the concern among the researchers and practitioners. The unregulated exposure of the nanoparticles to the soil is expected to cause adverse effects on the soil microbiota and in some cases negatively impact the important adaphic factors like soil infertility and toxicity. The studies conducted so far have shown diverse responses of nanoparticles by soil fungi and soil bacteria. The enzymatic activities of the microbes have been reported to be affected when the stress is induced from different sources. In some studies, silver nanoparticles have been found to decrease FDA- hydrolysis in soil. More research still needs to be done on addressing the nanoparticle induced metal-stress by different microbes. This review provides the comprehensive account of side effects of the nanoparticles on soil fertility and their effect on the different properties of soil and plant growth along with the research gaps in the field of soil application of nanoparticles and way forward to introduce an ecofriendly application of nanoparticles.

Keywords

Nanotechnology, sustainable, microbiota, nano-pesticides, insecticides

Introduction

Nanotechnology is one of the versatile technologies which find a wide application in material and living world. Nanoparticles have a size of 10-9 which works as an efficient carrier of the targeted molecules to atomic and subatomic levels and facilitate in development of novel things with desirable characteristics. This manipulation of atoms and molecules for design and development of novel products may be either top down which means reducing the size of the smallest structures to the nanoscale e.g. photonics applications in nanoelectronics and nanoengineering or the bottom up which involves manipulating individual atoms and molecules into nanostructures and more closely resembles chemistry or biology (Figure 1).

Figure 1. An Overview of Effect of nanoparticles on Soil Health

A nanometer is a billionth of a meter. Overall nano refers to a size scale between 1 nanometer (nm) and 100 nm in at least one dimension and involves developing or modifying materials or devices within that size. To address the challenge of making technology more sustainable, ecofriendly and of precised application, nanotechnology is emerging up as a technology of choice. The research and application of nanotechnology in other sectors is gaining steady momentum, the same in agriculture and tool processing is yet to get in the mainstream research [1]. With the application of nanoparticles enhancing the soil fertility and supporting organic cycles in the soil, the microbial activity is enhanced which helps in addressing the wastelands, infertile lands and toxic landscapes to support vegetation and farming.  In the existing croplands, the nanoparticles mediated nanofertilizers support in increasing the fertility and crop growth. Overall, nanotechnology provides the efficiency of the agriculture for a higher population. Since the agriculture sector has a huge responsibility of producing food for the world, the advent of technology and particularly, nanotechnology is probably going to encourage and outline the following phase of advancement of crops, animal farming, pesticides and accuracy cultivating strategies (Figure 2) [2].

Figure 2. Nanotechnology and its relation with other fields

Nanotechnology in agriculture

Agriculture farming is the foundation of most developing economies; roughly 60% of the population relies upon horticulture for their work. Indian farming division represents 18% of India's total national output (GDP) and gives work to 50%of the workforce of the nation. Nanotechnology impacts the horticulture efficiency with the assistance of the Nano-fertilizer, Nano-pesticides or Nano-herbicides which act as a smart delivery system to plants, likewise the different industries making definitions with Nanoparticles (100-250 nm) to improve their activities by expanding Nanoparticles solubility in water. The soil is a very important component of the land and it is the mixture of organic matter, minerals, gases, liquid and organism that support the life on the earth.

Soil

Soil well-being has been defined as the limit of soil to work as a living framework, with the environment and land use limits, to continue plant and living system efficiency, keep up or upgrade water and air quality, and advanced plant and living organism's well-being. Solid soils keep up a various network of soil creatures that assistance to control plant disease, pests, and insects, frame salutary cooperative relationship with plant roots; reuse fundamental plant supplements; enhance soil structure with positive repercussions for soil water and supplement holding limit, and improvement in the yield of crops [3]. There are four important factors i.e. carbon transformations, soil structure maintenance, control of pests and diseases and the nutrients cycle; play a significant role in the soil health. In detail, we can say that all these factors broadly depend upon biochemical process and microbial activities performed by a small microorganism present in the soil.   

It is reported that NPs in medicine and biology was valued at US$17.5 billion in 2011 with the further estimate to reach approximately US $53.5 billion in 2017 and US$79.8 billion in 2019 [4]. Silver NPs are estimated to be used up to 4 t per year [5]. Zinc NPs are estimated to be produced up to 5500 t per year replacing their bulk counterparts in a range of products [6].

The studies based upon the modeling and analysis provides a piece of information regarding synthesis, application and unsafe disposal of various nanoparticles in huge amount (several hundred tons) every year. Metallic oxide-based nanoparticles e.g. Ag, Al, C, Ce, Cu, Fe, Si, Ti, Zn are accumulated in the environment in association with soil, sludge, and other wastes. Other natural resources like air and water are mostly contaminated with a significant amount of nanoparticles [7]. The increasing quantity of NPs is expected to prompt high concentration in the environment and potentially a higher risk to the living beings. Residues and deposits in large quantities will expand the likelihood of antagonistic associations between living things and nanoparticles [8]. It is reported that nanoparticles affect microscopic properties of soil, e.g., humic acid content and soil bacterial community [9] nanoparticles once released in the environment have an influence on microbial diversity and can also affect plant growth [10]. As the higher utilization of nanotechnology in numerous applications is increasing, it is raising various issues like ecological, toxicological, agricultural, well-being and security, mechanical, strategy, and administrative aspects. A few uses incorporate deliberate arrival of NPs into nature bringing about expanded quantity and concentration after a long time [11] without intense poisonous quality; bioaccumulation and long term exposure and presentation have unsurprising effects on the evolved way of life, which is unanswered [12].

Types of nanoparticles

Nanoparticles can be arranged into various forms as indicated by the size, morphology, physical and substance properties. Some of them are carbon-based nanoparticles, ceramic nanoparticle, metal nanoparticle, semiconductor based nanoparticle, polymeric nanoparticles and lipid-based nanoparticles. Based on shape, they can be classified into quantum dots, nanotubes, nanofibres, nanorods, nanosheets, aerogel and nanoballs [13] and  can also be classified as either magnetic or non-magnetic nanoparticles.

Metallic nanoparticles are silver (Ag), gold (Au), titanium oxide (TiO2), iron oxide (Fe2O3), zinc oxide (ZnO), or copper (Cu). Silver nanoparticles are the most  utilized nanoparticles as antimicrobial operators for water treatment and in material enterprises; in gadgets, tranquilize drug transport, and agribusiness [14] Gold nanoparticles are used in the diagnosis of cancer, TiO2 used as photocatalyst due to no toxicity (Figure 3) (Table 1).

Figure 3. Different types of Nanoparticles.

Table 1. Types of nanoparticles and their uses.

CLASS

TYPES

USES

 

 

 

Metallic

Silver (Ag)

Drug delivery, Water Treatment, Electronic

Gold (Au)

Cancer diagnosis, DNA fingerprinting, Stem cell detection

Titanium dioxide (TiO2)

Food additive, Water purification, medical application

Zincoxide (ZnO)

Cosmetics, Drug delivery, biosensors.

Copper (Cu)

Electronics, catalyst, medicine, bioanalysis

 

Carbon-based

Fullerene

Drug carrier, medical imaging

Graphene

Cancer therapy, tissue engineering, bioimaging, drug delivery.

Silica-based

SiO2

Biosensor, Drug Additives

Polymeric/

Organic

Chitosan poly (lactidoco-glycolide), polyacrylate

Drug delivery

Silver nanoparticles

Silver nanoparticles are in size from 1 to 100nm. Usually illustrated as silver, but with a high surface dimension and a modest number of molecules contain an expansive measure of oxides. Different kinds of nanoparticles can be made depending upon the application.  Silver nanoparticles (AgNPs) have novel physiochemical properties which enables them to be utilized in various field including medicine, food and mechanical industries application.

Silver nanoparticles have a high surface area and part of surface molecules; subsequently, have a high antimicrobial impact when contrasted with the bulk silver [15]. Antimicrobial property of silver nanoparticles has been utilized against a wide range of human pathogens [16-18]. In many cases, the maximum capacity is still to be investigated for product assurance. In this way, there is a developing enthusiasm to use the antimicrobial property of silver nanoparticles for plant disease management [19]. Silver nanoparticles have been testing as pesticides to diminish the weight of vermin from yields. Silver nanoparticles can be combined from physical, concoction and organic strategies. Attributable to the prerequisite of outrageous conditions and dangerous synthetic substances in physical and chemical strategies, biomaterial-based techniques are broadly utilized in these days. Being single step union and eco-friendly, extraordinary analysts have organized silver nanoparticles from different sources (plants, bacteria, fungi etc.) These silver nanoparticles have been utilized to dispose of harmful microorganisms in plants. The introduction of the snails in the soil lattice to silver nanoparticles in a research facility was observed to diminish the movement and the feasibility of the land snail and about 20% of silver nanoparticles treated snail just as the recurrence of parasitic population in the encompassing soil [20]. Spherical shaped silver nanoparticles in size range of ∼10 to 20 nm using culture supernatant of Serratia sp. BHU-S4 and their effective application for the management of spot blotch disease in wheat have experimented. Silver nanoparticles exhibited strong antifungal activity against Bipolarissorokiniana, the spot blotch pathogen of wheat. Effect of silver nanoparticles with diameters of 20 nm on seeds of Fenugreek (Trigonella foenum-graecum) has been carried out [21] different concentrations of silver nanoparticles were utilized and results demonstrated that extreme seed germination. These outcomes uncovered that utilization of silver nanoparticles could be utilized to significantly upgrade seed germination potential, means germination time, seed germination record, seed power file, seedling crisp weight, and dry weight.

Zinc oxide nanoparticles

Zinc deficiency is a most basic micronutrient issue that unfavorably influences farming generation in antacid soils with calcium carbonate [22]. The soil with calcium carbonate is a noteworthy wellspring of agribusiness in bone-dry or Mediterranean conditions of the world.

Zinc oxides (ZnO) and zinc sulfates (ZnSO4•H2O) or (ZnSO4•7H2O) are generally utilized as zinc manures to address deficiency of zinc in soils [23]. The utilization of zinc oxide nanoparticles as zinc composts may build zinc disintegration and its bioavailability in soils with calcium carbonate. Zinc oxide nanoparticles antimicrobial action over vast zinc particles since the little size under 100 nm and high surface-to-volume proportion of nanoparticles permits better connection with microscopic organisms [24].

 Zinc oxide nanoparticles have the ability to induce reactive oxygen species (ROS) generation, which can lead to cell death when the antioxidative capacity of the cell is exceeded [25-28]. Zinc nanoparticles have shown to induce free radical formation in wheat, resulting in increased malondialdehyde and lower levels of reduced glutathione and reduced chlorophyll contents [29]. Zinc oxide nanoparticles utilizing leaf extract of Moringa oleifera in size range from 16 to 20 nm has been used as  antimicrobial  against bacterial strains, for example, Staphylococcus aureus, Bacillus subtilis, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, Proteus mirabilis, Escherichia coli, and other parasitic strains, for example, Candida albicans and Candida tropicalis utilizing the agar plate dissemination strategy has been tried. The most extreme zone of inhibition was seen in Staphylococcus aureus (23.8 ± 0.76) when contrasted with others. Circular and hexagonal zinc oxide nanoparticles from Parthenium hysterophorus L. have been blended by in costly, eco-friendly and basic strategy utilizing distinctive groupings of half and 25% of Parthenium leaf separates with size 27 ± 5 and 84 ± 2 nm, individually. These zinc oxide nanoparticles were investigated for the size-subordinate antifungal action against plant parasitic pathogens, for example, Aspergillus flavus and Aspergillus niger. A most extreme zone of inhibition was watched for 27 ± 5 nm measure zinc oxide nanoparticles against Aspergillus flavus and Aspergillus niger. Parthenium synthesise zinc oxide nanoparticles turned out to be great antifungal specialists and condition neighborly [30]. Round formed zinc oxide nanoparticles with a normal size of 23 to 57 nm were set up by zinc acetic acid derivation and sodium hydroxide utilizing leaves of Catharanthus roseus (L.) G. Wear leaf separates. The orchestrated zinc oxide nanoparticles were assessed for antibacterial action against gram-negative microscopic organisms Escherichia coli (ATCC 25922) Pseudomonas aeruginosa (ATCC 15442), gram-positive Staphylococcus aureus (ATCC 6538) and Bacillus thuringiensis (ATCC 10792). Bacillus thuringiensis demonstrated the protection from zinc oxide nanoparticles pursued by Escherichia coli though Pseudomonas aeruginosa was more susceptible.

Titanium dioxide (TiO2) nanoparticles

Titanium is a hard, corrosion safe metal and its compound titanium dioxide is a mainstream photo catalyst, utilized in the production of color pigments [31]. Titanium animates generation of more starches, empowering development and photosynthesis rate in plants [32]. Titanium dioxide has appeared reactant action for the debasement of pesticides [33]. Photo catalyst property of titanium dioxide has applications in plant assurance since it doesn't frame poisonous and unsafe substances thus have strong pathogen removal efficiency. Researchers are attempting to enhance the phytopathogenic sanitization productivity of titanium dioxide thin films by dye doping and other reasonable strategies [34]. Plants are likewise the most probable selection of researchers for the synthesis of titanium dioxide nanoparticles. Circular, grouped titanium dioxide nanoparticles with a normal size of 32.58 nm from the leaf concentrate of Psidium guajava have been integrated [35]. These nanoparticles were tried against microorganisms Aeromonas hydrophila (MTCC-1739), Proteus mirabilis (MTCC-442), Escherichia coli (MTCC1677), Staphylococcus aureus (MTCC-3160) and Pseudomonas aeruginosa (MTCC-4030). The highest zone of inhibition was seen against Staphylococcus aureus (25 mm) and Escherichia coli (23 mm) when titanium dioxide nanoparticles were utilized at 20μg/mL fixation. The integrated TiO2 nanoparticles indicated upgraded antibacterial activity than the standard anti-microbial plate, antibiotic medication which decreased the odds for the advancement of anti-infection agents obstruction of bacterial species. The concentrate from plants and titanium dioxide nanoparticles orchestrated from these had the best cancer prevention agent activity when compared with ascorbic acid. Synthesis of spherical clusters, quite polydispersed titanium dioxide nanoparticles with a size range from 36 to 68 nm by Eclipta prostrata leaf extract has been done effectively [36].

Application of nanotechnology in agriculture

Agriculture practices like farming are the foundation of a large portion of the developing nations in which a huge income originates from agribusiness and the greater part of the population relies upon it for their job. The current worldwide population is almost 6 billion with half living in Asia. A huge extent of those livings in developing or emerging nations confront everyday nourishment deficiencies because of ecological effects or political shakiness, while in the created world there is a sustenance overflow. For emerging economies, the drive is to develop dry pest resistance and drought resistance crops additionally high yield. In emerged economies, the food business is driven by buyer request which is at present for fresher and more advantageous.

In farming and other agriculture practices, nanotechnology has been utilized for the controlled arrival of agrochemicals (e.g., composts, pesticides, and herbicides) and target-specific delivery of biomolecules (e.g., nucleotides, proteins, and activators) [37]. Nanotechnology has been utilized in the development fertilizers having a potential capacity of discharge and pesticides with better wide range bother insurance productivity [38]. Nanotechnology has been utilized to transfer DNA to plant cells, improve supplement ingestion, recognize plant pathogens, control plant hormones, and in animal farming, nanocapsules have been contrived to convey antibodies. Nanotechnology has a few applications in all phases of generation, preparing, putting away, bundling and transport of rural items [39]. Be that as it may, the vast majority of the work on nanotechnology in horticulture is at the developing stage and not yet popularize.

Effect of nanoparticles on soil

Soil is the largest receptor for the nanoparticles.  Behavior of nanoparticles in the soil and their risk evaluation in arable soil ecosystems or other real environmental scenarios is very topical to date40. Soil is the natural matrix and rich in natural nanoparticles both as primary particles and as agglomerates/aggregates. Artificial entry of nanoparticle into the soil may have significant effect, as they may be extremely resistant to degradation and have the potential to accumulate in the soil.

Ben-Moshe et al. (2013) reported affect of nanoparticles on many microscopic properties of the soil. The protection of soil microbial biomass and diversity is one of the major issues in the field of sustainable use of soils [41]. The effect of nanoparticle on the soil depends on their concentration, soil type, and enzymatic activity of soil. At high concentrations of nanoparticles, the negative effect on dehydrogenase enzymes activity was observed [42]. Another negative effect caused by nanoparticles is the influence on the rate of soil self-cleaning as well as on the balance of nutrients, which is the basis for the regulation of the processes of plant nutrition and soil fertility improvement [43,44]. It is significant to study presence of nanoparticle in soil and their influence on soil biodiversity [45].

 Soil properties, such as pH, texture, structure, and organic matter content, influence the soil microbial community and the ability of pollutants to have toxic effects on microorganism [46]. Nanoparticles could affect mobility of soil pollutants. Therefore, there is a need to compare the toxicity of the NPs in various types of soils. The soil amended with digestate and fly ash reduced the pollutant bioavailability. Another study suggests that particle size distribution and the composition of the organic matter change microbial populations in the contaminated soils [47]. Intentional influence on soil properties and composition and texture of the soil with various substances can also alter the effects of nanoparticles. Biochar is a soil minor change used for increasing soil fertility and productivity48show minimal effects of CeO2 NPs on plants in biochar-amended soil. Interaction between NPs and biochar-amended soil is not well studied.

Effect of nanoparticles on crop growth

The rapid growth of nanoparticle production and widespread use in agriculture have increased the quick development in the production of  nanoparticle its application in farming and other agriculture practices have expanded the chances of coming and blending to the nanoparticles in the field' s soil (fertile soil of forms). It is presently notable that some nanoparticles influence crop improvement, plant advancement, yield, and huge numbers of them are aggregated in various plant tissues, including the eatable piece of plant tissues. It is difficult to survey the seriousness of the nanoparticles on the eco-frameworks and human wellbeing. It is trusted that nanoparticles are most troublesome sort of poison from manages and they are undetectable in view of its very small size (Nanometer range). Different investigations of the nanoparticles impact on yields, for example, onion, spinach, coriander, wheat, rice, soybean, mung bean, radish, lettuce, grain, cucumber, and tobacco have appeared of germination, diminished shoots and root development, poisonous quality, and diminishes in photosynthetic rate and chlorophyll contents,(Table 2) [49-57].

Table 2. Effect of nanoparticles on the physiological changes in plants.

Types of Nanoparticle

Concentration

Physiological changes

References

TiO2

10-2000 mg/l

Exposure of Lemna minor to TiO2 NPs increased the activities of various enzymes (POD, SOD, and CAT) below concentration of 200 mg/l because of eliminating accumulated reactive oxygen species in plant cells.

Song et al. (2012) [52]

Al2O3

10-1000 mg/l

The activity of SOD and CAT were increased with the  treatments of Al2O3 NPs at a concentration of 200 and 500 mg/l.

Riahi-Madvar et al. (2012) [53]

ZnO

10 mg/l

Treatment of cluster bean with foliar sprays of ZnO NPs caused a significant increase in chlorophyll content (276.2 %), total soluble leaf protein (27.1%), acid phosphatase (73.5%), alkaline phosphatase (48.7%), and phytase (72.4%) over control.

Raliya and Tarafdar (2013) [54]

Fe2O3

20 mg/l

Increase in root activity, activity of catalase, peroxidase, superoxide dismutase, chlorophyll, malondialdehyde  contents, ferric reductase activity, the root apoplastic iron content were recorded by the translocation of the significant amount of Fe2O3 NPs suspended in a liquid medium to various tissues of plants.

Li et al. (2016) [55]

SNP

ZnO

 

500-4,000 ppm

Application of various concentrations of both sulfur and zinc oxide nanoparticles in significantly increase the total lipids, proteins, amino acids, thiol and chlorophyll contents compared to untreated control but no significance difference has been observed among the treatments with various concentrations for both nanoparticles.

Patra et al. (2013) [56]

TiO2

200 mg/l

Application of TiO2 NPs had a noticeable effect on chlorophyll a and b and carotenoid contents on Mentha.

Samadi et al. (2014) [57]

Effect of nanoparticles on plant growth

Nanoparticles related with plants causing different morphological and physiological changes, contingent upon the type and nature of the nanoparticles. The viability of nanoparticles is controlled by their substance synthesis, measure, surface covering, reactivity, and above all the portion at which they are successful [58]. Scientists from their investigations indicated both positive and negative impacts of nanoparticles on plant development and improvement, and the effect of designed nanoparticles (ENPs) on plants relies upon the structure, fixation, concentration, and biochemical and physical properties of NPs just as plant species [59] (Table 3) [59-64].

Table 3. Effect of nanoparticles on plant species and their metabolism

Nanoparticles

Size range

Plant

Biological effects

Reference

 

 

 

 

 

 

Ag

1–10 mg L1

Triticum aestivum L.

Adversely affect seedling growth and

Vannini et al. 2014

1000–3000 mM

Pisum sativum L.

chlorophyll fluorescence

Tripathi et al. 2017

 

Allium cepa

Caused oxidative stress and exhibited toxicity

Cvjetko et al. 2017

5–25 nm; 0–40 mg L1

 

 

Phaseolus radiatus,

 

 

Higher accumulation in roots and shoots.

Lee et al. 2012 [60]

Au

25–100 mg L

Arabidopsis thaliana,

Root length reduced by 75%. Accumulation

Taylor et al. 2014 [61]

CeO2 ZnO

0.05–0.5 g kg1 soil

Glycine max

Increased ROS, lipid peroxidation, visible

Priester et al. 2017 [62]

CuO                             

0–1000 mg L1

Conventional and

Inhibited the growth, development, nutrient

Van et al. 2016a [63]

200–500 mg L1

Ipt-cotton

Height and root length decreased, increased

Van et al. 2016b [64]

Role of nanotechnology in photosynthesis

Photosynthesis is the procedure utilized by plants, green algae, and certain other microbes to prepare food. Photosynthesis is a key maker for plants on earth that changes light vitality to concoction vitality. Plants convert just 2-4 % of the accessible vitality in radiation into new plant development [65]. Lin et al. 2014, grew new tobacco plants by substituting the Rubisco quality for carbon-settling in the tobacco plant, with two qualities of cyanobacterium Synechococcus lengthens; these newly designed plants have more photosynthetic productivity than local plants.  

It was reported that SWCNTs in the detached chloroplast enlarged multiple times higher photosynthetic activity than that of controls, and improved most extreme electron transport rates, and SWCNTs empowered the plants to detect nitric oxide, a singling substance [66]. Metal nanoparticles can prompt the productivity of synthetic vitality creation in photosynthetic frameworks [67]. The chlorophyll in photosynthetic response focus binds to the AuNPs and Ag nanocrystals, in this way framing a novel half framework that may create multiple times increasingly energized electrons due to plasmon surface response and quick electron-separation. The improvement components may help in the plan of light-harvesting frameworks.

Effect of nanoparticles grain size distribution

It was found that a reasonable connection between the grain estimate distribution of the field soil (for example the sand and earth content) and the toxic effect of AgNMs towards smelling salts oxidizing microscopic organisms. Past examinations have demonstrated that the maintenance of nanomaterials for the most part increments and the bioavailability decreases in soils with a better grain estimate distribution [68]. It is discovered that the danger of AgNMs accumulation in soils with a higher sand substance or lower mud content. The connection between AgNM toxicity and sand content was not straight but there was a decent connection between the sand content and higher danger. There was a superior connection between AgNM harmfulness and mud content, with just little deviations. The maintenance of AgNMs in common soil has recently been appeared to increment in accordance with the granulometric mud content [69] which may advance the heteroaggregation of AgNM and mud standard ticles, expanding the total size and making them less accessible to microorganisms, in this way bringing about a lower lethality. The arrangement of buildings with earth particles may likewise hinder the arrival of particles. It demonstrates that the soil grain measure dissemination is by all accounts the most critical soil property affecting the lethality of AgNMs.

Effect of nanoparticles on pH of soil

Soil pH is a significant factor that directly relates to soil fertility and health. It is an indication of acidic or alkalinity of the soil. Soil pH affects the availability of the nutrients for plants. It is proved that the nature of acidity or basicity of soil depends upon the composition of the soil. In general optimum pH range for plants is 5-7. It is observed that the pH of the soil may be influenced by the accumulation of the different type of nanoparticles like Zn, Ag, Au, Cu etc. It was found that the pH of the soil also influences the toxicity of nanoparticles on the microorganisms and nematodes. The effect of organic matter and pH of the soil on the toxicity of ZnO nanoparticles on Folsomia candida . It was found greater toxicity the effect of Zn nanoparticles then dissolved Zn on the bacterial community . Very recently found that copper oxide nanoparticles may able to change the pH of paddy soil. Copper oxide nanoparticles cause an increase in the pH of soil which ultimately affects soil property. Uptake of Silver nanoparticles accumulated in soil by insects may also be influenced by the pH of the soil .

Soil pH seems to be the principal factor that governs concentrations of soluble metals. Zn solubility correlates negatively with pH [73]. Moreover, clay content in calcareous soil was higher than in acidic soil, which increase Zn retention in soil and hence, decreases Zn availability to microorganisms, as clays are believed to adsorb zinc ions across both ion exchange and specific adsorption. Zinc availability has also been connected to soil organic matter content. In this study, the soil organic matter content effect of content on Zn availability to microorganisms should be considered insignificant because values were very low and similar in both soils. The impacts of nanomaterials are firmly subject to the change forms they experience in nature. AgNM are oxidized in nature, and the release of silver particles might be in charge of the lethal effect [74]. Both the oxidation of AgNMs and the release of particles are reliant on the pH of the soil.

This concurs with previous findings about demonstrating that the toxicity of AgNMs towards earthworms is related with the particle content in the soil pore water [75]. The impact of ZnO nanomaterials is additionally caused for the most part by the released of particles, which proposes the outcomes ought to be similar with those watched for AgNMs. In like manner, the impact of ZnO nanomaterials on the proliferation of Folsomia candida demonstrated that the poisonous quality of metallic nanomaterials was reliant on soil pH, and again that the danger expanded in progressively acidic soils. The impact of Zn danger on the multiplication of Eisenia fetida is affected by pH for all types of Zn, reflecting the impact of pH on Zn disintegration [76].

Effect of nanoparticles on soil organic carbon

We additionally researched the effect of the natural carbon content on AgNM toxicity since this parameter may impact the impact of nanomaterials [77]. The natural carbon content differed between 0.93% and 3.85%, however there was no connection between the natural carbon substance of the five soils we tried and the lethality of either AgNM or silver nitrate.

There are signs in the writing that natural issue can change the impacts of nanomaterials, particularly those which discharge particles. For instance, the poisonous quality of AgNMs towards the freshwater zooplankton Ceriodaphnia dubia and Daphnia magna declined altogether as the broke down natural carbon content expanded [78]. AgNMs are less versatile in soils with a high substance of natural issue [79] in light of the fact that natural materials, for example, sewage slop connect with AgNMs, with sorption rates more prominent than 90% for uncoated particles [80] and lower rates for functionalized particles. Concentrates with biofilm networks and unadulterated societies have additionally appeared natural issue, for example, exopolysaccharides and humic acids can secure microorganisms and diminish the poisonous quality of AgNMs [81]. For instance, the nearness of Suwannee River humic acids made it difficult to decide an impact on the development of Pseudomonas fluorescens . In any case, these discoveries are for the most part from investigations in which the impact of natural carbon was tried on amphibian life forms though comparable information for soil life forms are increasingly constrained. It is already demonstrated that AgNMs and the particles discharged by them communicate with natural issue added to soil, diminishing the long haul harmful consequences for the aggregate of microbial exercises bringing about nitrate gathering [82]. The proposed mechanisms for the restraint of AgNM disintegration incorporate surface adsorption onto common natural issue (which thus forestalls AgNM oxidation and the arrival of silver particles) and the decreasing action of humic/fulvic acids which changes over oxidation items once more into silver metal [83].

Effect of nanoparticles on microbial diversity

As indicated by the examination directed by [84] TiO2 and CuO nanoparticles diminish the microbial biomass of the form soil and action of the chemical, influenced on their structures in overflowed paddy soil. Comparable outcomes were acquired biometal who contemplated the impact of ZnO, TiO2, CeO2, andFe3O4 nanoparticles on enzymatic activities of soil (invertase, urease, catalase, and phosphatase) and bacterial networks of the saline-soluble base and black soils. The outcomes demonstrated an effect on soil chemical exercises and changes in soil bacterial network and danger on natural nitrogen obsession. Results gotten have demonstrated that a high convergence of Fe3O4 NPs altogether diminished the substance of microscopic organisms in the soil. Zinc oxide and CeO2 NPs influenced the plate checks of Azotobacter, P-solubilizing, and-solubilizing microscopic organisms and restrain enzymatic exercises [85]. Titanium dioxide NPs diminished the plenitude of utilitarian soil microscopic organisms and enzymatic activities and hindering impact on microbial action, occurrence, and diversity [86,87]. The information provided by [88] Maliszewska (2016) reported that the biogenic Au NPs up to the grouping of 33 mg kg−1 don't influence the soil properties and their processes and can be delegated not destructive. Be that as it may, antibacterial exercises (development of a zone of inhibition) were seen on clinical disconnects (Bacillus subtilis, Escherichia coli, Klebsiellapneumonia, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, Salmonella typhi, and Staphylococcus aureus) treated with ZnO NPs incorporated by organic and concoction techniques [89].

Copper ions, released from the Cu NPs, were considered as a major cause of lethality to both the pathogenic and the beneficial bacteria [90]. It was investigated the effect of CuO and AgNPs on leaf microbial decomposition showing that exposure to these NPs led to a decrease in leaf decomposition rate (Table 4) [91-95].

Table 4. Effect of nanoparticles on soil microbial community and enzymes.

Nanomaterials

Major effect

References

Au

Hinderance in enzymatic activities of soil

 Asadishad et al., 2017

TiO2

The loss in diversity of the bacterial community

Ge et al., 2012 [92]

Cu

Decreases C, N Biomass

Kumar et al.,2012 [93]

Ag

Loss of microbial community, hindrance in enzymatic activities

Peyrote et al.,2014;

Colman et al., 2013

Mixture of Cu and Fe

Loss of microbial community

Ben-Mosey et al.,2013

Mixture of Co, Fe, Ni and Ag

Not much effect on the soil community

Shah et al., 2014

Ag

β-Glucosidase, acid phosphatase, dehydrogenase, Urease

 Hnsch and Emmerling, 2010 [94]

C60

eucine-aminopeptidase, β-cellobiohydrolase, acid phosphatase, β-Glucosidase, chitinase, xylosidase

Tong et al., 2007 [95]

The researchers observed that TiO2, at high concentrations, can disturb the symbiosis relationship between plant and bacteria and have a negative effect on the growth of clover. In natural soil, the mobility of the nanoparticles was weak and no increase in the uptake of titanium dioxide by the plants was found.

The mobility of MWCNT in soils was also weak; the experiments showed a concentration-independent uptake of MWCNT by the plants and a reduction in the number of red clover blossoms in the case of high concentrations. Both TiO2 and MWCNT in very high concentrations resulted in a change in the composition of the microbial communities that interact with the plants (Table 5) [96-99].

Table 5. Effect of nanoparticles on soil nematodes community

Test Nanoparticles

Test species

Author/Year

MWNT, SWNT

Eisenia foetida

 Petersen et al., 2008 [96]

 

Tio2, ZnO

Eisenia foetida

 Hu et al.,2010 [97]

Al2O3

Eisenia foetida

Coleman et al.,2010 [98]

Pt

Caenorhabditis elegans

Kim et al., 2013 [99]

Ag

Caenorhabditis elegans

   Roh et al., 2009

ZnO

Caenorhabditis elegans

   Ma et al., 2009

CeO2, TiO2

Caenorhabditis elegans

   Roh et al., 2010

Conclusion

Nanobiotechnology accelerated almost every sector of agriculture sciences and crop research. It is well understood that the use of nanomaterial for the scientific and agriculture field enables a lot of advantages over conventional methods. Biofertilizers based on nanotechnology is quite useful for plant growth and developments. Biopesticides and no fungicides are more effective against disease and harmful insects. DNA delivery in crop research has become very easy with the help of nanobiotechnology. Uncontrolled and unregulated accumulation of nanomaterials in soil is a matter of concern. Since toxicity of nanomaterial is not unknown from late last decades. Investigations indication toxicity of nanomaterials is the emerging serious issue. Microbial community and soil health which directly or indirectly related to human health and wellbeing must be protected from the unnecessary deposition of nanomaterials. 

References

  1. Mishra S, Singh BR, Singh A, Keswani C, Naqvi AH, et al. (2014) Biofabricated silver nanoparticles act as a strong fungicide against Bipolaris sorokiniana causing spot blotch disease in wheat. PLoS One 9: e97881.
  2. Mousavi SR, Rezaei M (2011) Nanotechnology in agriculture and food production. J Appl Environ Biol Sci 1: 414-419.
  3. Yang Y, Wang, Y, Westerhoff P, Hristovski K, Jin VL, et al (2014) Metal and nanoparticle occurrence in biosolid-amended soils. Science of the Total Environment 485: 441-449.
  4. Weir A, Westerhoff P, Fabricius L, Hristovski K, Von Goetz N (2012) Titanium dioxide nanoparticles in food and personal care products. Environmental science technology 46 : 2242-2250.
  5. McGillicuddy E, Murray I, Kavanagh S, Morrison L, Fogarty A, et al (2017) Silver nanoparticles in the environment: Sources, detection and ecotoxicology. Science of the Total Environment 575: 231-246.
  6. Connolly M, Fernández M, Conde E, Torrent F, Navas JM, et al (2016) Tissue distribution of zinc and subtle oxidative stress effects after dietary administration of ZnO nanoparticles to rainbow trout. Science of The Total Environment 551: 334-343.
  7. Keller AA, McFerran S, Lazareva A, Suh S (2013) Global life cycle releases of engineered nanomaterials. Journal of Nanoparticle Research 15: 1692.
  8. Yadav T, Mungray AA, Mungray AK (2014) Fabricated nanoparticles: current status and potential phytotoxic threats. Reviews of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology volume 83-110.
  9. Ben-Moshe T, Frenk S, Dror I, Minz D, Berkowitz B (2013) Effects of metal oxide nanoparticles on soil properties. Chemosphere 90: 640-646.
  10. Kumar N, Shah V, Walker VK (2012) Influence of a nanoparticle mixture on an arctic soil community. Environmental toxicology and chemistry 31:131-135.
  11. Tiede K, Hanssen SF, Westerhoff P, Fern GJ, Hankin SM, et al. (2016) How important is drinking water exposure for the risks of engineered nanoparticles to consumers. Nanotoxicology 10: 1102-1110.
  12. Tiede K, Boxall AB, Tear SP, Lewis J, David H, et al. (2008) Detection and characterization of engineered nanoparticles in food and the environment. Food additives and contaminants 25: 795-821.
  13. Wang H, Zhao R, Li Y, Liu H, Li F, et al. (2016) Aspect ratios of gold nanoshell capsules mediated melanoma ablation by synergistic photothermal therapy and chemotherapy. Nanomedicine: Nanotechnology, Biology and Medicine 12: 439-448.
  14. Sharma VK, Yngard RA, Lin Y (2009) Silver nanoparticles: green synthesis and their antimicrobial activities. Advances in colloid and interface science 145: 83-96.
  15. Cho KH, Park JE, Osaka T, Park SG (2005) The study of antimicrobial activity and preservative effects of nanosilver ingredient. Electrochimica Acta 51: 956-960.
  16. Morones JR, Elechiguerra JL, Camacho A, Holt K, Kouri JB, et al. (2005) The bactericidal effect of silver nanoparticles. Nanotechnology 16: 2346.
  17. Tian J, Wong KK, Ho CM, Lok CN, Yu WY, et al. (2007) Topical delivery of silver nanoparticles promotes wound healing. ChemMedChem: Chemistry Enabling Drug Discovery 2: 129-136.
  18. Oves M, Khan MS, Zaidi A, Ahmed AS, Ahmed F, et al. (2013) Antibacterial and cytotoxic efficacy of extracellular silver nanoparticles biofabricated from chromium reducing novel OS4 strain of Stenotrophomonas maltophilia. PloS one 8: e59140.
  19. Mishra S, Singh BR, Singh A, Keswani C, Naqvi AH, et al. (2014) Biofabricated silver nanoparticles act as a strong fungicide against Bipolaris sorokiniana causing spot blotch disease in wheat. PLoS One 9: e97881.
  20. Ali SM, Yousef NM, Nafady NA (2015) Application of biosynthesized silver nanoparticles for the control of land snail Eobania vermiculata and some plant pathogenic fungi. Journal of Nanomaterials 2015: 3.
  21. Hojjat SS (2015) Impact of silver nanoparticles on germinated fenugreek seed. Int. J Agric Crop Sci 8: 627-630.
  22. Takkar PN, Walker CD (1993) The distribution and correction of zinc deficiency. In Zinc in soils and plants 151-165.
  23. Mortvedt JJ (1992) Crop response to level of water-soluble zinc in granular zinc fertilizers. Fertilizer research 33: 249-255.
  24. Xie Y, He Y, Irwin PL, Jin T, Shi X (2011) Antibacterial activity and mechanism of action of zinc oxide nanoparticles against Campylobacter jejuni. Applied and environmental microbiology 77: 2325-2331.
  25. Xia T, Kovochich M, Brant J, Hotze M, Sempf J, et al. (2006) Comparison of the abilities of ambient and manufactured nanoparticles to induce cellular toxicity according to an oxidative stress paradigm. Nano letters 6: 1794-1807.
  26. Ryter SW, Kim HP, Hoetzel A, Park JW, Nakahira K, et al. (2007) Mechanisms of cell death in oxidative stress. Antioxidants redox signaling 9: 49-89.
  27. Long TC, Saleh N, Tilton RD, Lowry GV, Veronesi B (2006) Titanium dioxide (P25) produces reactive oxygen species in immortalized brain microglia (BV2): implications for nanoparticle neurotoxicity. Environmental science technology 40: 4346-4352.
  28. Panda SK, Chaudhury I, Khan M H (2003) Heavy metals induce lipid peroxidation and affect antioxidants in wheat leaves. Biologia Plantarum 46: 289-294.
  29. Aarti PD, Tanaka R, Tanaka A (2006) Effects of oxidative stress on chlorophyll -biosynthesis in cucumber (Cucumis sativus) cotyledons. Physiologia Plantarum 128: 186-197.
  30. Rajiv P, Rajeshwari S, Venckatesh R (2013) Bio-Fabrication of zinc oxide nanoparticles using leaf extract of Parthenium hysterophorus L. and its size-dependent antifungal activity against plant fungal pathogens. Spectrochimica Acta Part A: Molecular and Biomolecular Spectroscopy 112: 384-387.
  31. Sang L, Zhao Y, Burda C (2014) TiO2 Nanoparticles as Functional Building Blocks. Chemical Reviews 114: 9283-9318.
  32. 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.
  33. Pelaez M, Nolan NT, Pillai SC, Seery MK, Falaras P, et al. (2012) A review on the visible light active titanium dioxide photocatalysts for environmental applications. Applied Catalysis B: Environmental 125: 331-349.
  34. You T, Liu D, Chen J, Yang Z, Dou R, et al. (2018) Effects of metal oxide nanoparticles on soil enzyme activities and bacterial communities in two different soil types. Journal of Soils and Sediments 18: 211-221.
  35. Santhoshkumar T, Rahuman AA, Jayaseelan C, Rajakumar G, Marimuthu S, et al. (2014) Green synthesis of titanium dioxide nanoparticles using Psidium guajava extract and its antibacterial and antioxidant properties. Asian Pacific journal of tropical medicine 7: 968-976.
  36. Rajkumar KS, Kanipandian N, Thirumurugan R (2016) Toxicity assessment on haemotology, biochemical and histopathological alterations of silver nanoparticles-exposed freshwater fish Labeo rohita. Applied Nanoscience 6: 19-29.
  37. Chhipa H (2017) Nanofertilizers and nanopesticides for agriculture. Environmental chemistry letters 15: 15-22.
  38. Cheng Z, Dong F, Xu J, Liu X, Wu X, et al. (2017) Simultaneous determination of organophosphorus pesticides in fruits and vegetables using atmospheric pressure gas chromatography quadrupole-time-of-flight mass spectrometry. Food chemistry 231: 365-373.
  39. Hasan S (2015) A review on nanoparticles: their synthesis and types. Research Journal of Recent Sciences 2277: 2502.
  40. Chai H, Yao J, Sun J, Zhang C, Liu W, et al. (2015) The effect of metal oxide nanoparticles on functional bacteria and metabolic profiles in agricultural soil. Bulletin of environmental contamination and toxicology 94: 490-495.
  41. Torsvik V, Øvreås L (2002) Microbial diversity and function in soil: from genes to ecosystems. Current opinion in microbiology 5: 240-245.
  42. Jośko I, Oleszczuk P, Futa B (2014) The effect of inorganic nanoparticles (ZnO, Cr2O3, CuO and Ni) and their bulk counterparts on enzyme activities in different soils. Geoderma 232: 528-537.
  43. Janvier C, Villeneuve F, Alabouvette C, Edel-Hermann V, Mateille T, et al. (2007) Soil health through soil disease suppression: which strategy from descriptors to indicators. Soil biology and Biochemistry 39: 1-23.
  44. Suresh Y, Annapurna S, Bhikshamaiah G, Singh A K (2013) Characterization of green synthesized copper nanoparticles: A novel approach. In International Conference on Advanced Nanomaterials Emerging Engineering Technologies. 2013: 63-67.
  45. Bondarenko O, Juganson K, Ivask A, Kasemets K, Mortimer M, et al. (2013) Toxicity of Ag, CuO and ZnO nanoparticles to selected environmentally relevant test organisms and mammalian cells in vitro: a critical review. Archives of toxicology 87: 1181-1200.
  46. Simonin M, Richaume A (2015) Impact of engineered nanoparticles on the activity, abundance, and diversity of soil microbial communities: a review. Environmental Science and Pollution Research 22: 13710-13723.
  47. Calvarro LM, de Santiago-Martín A, Gómez J Q, González-Huecas C, Quintana JR, et al.  (2014) Biological activity in metal-contaminated calcareous agricultural soils: the role of the organic matter composition and the particle size distribution. Environmental Science and Pollution Research 21: 6176-6187.
  48. Servin AD, White JC (2016) Nanotechnology in agriculture: next steps for understanding engineered nanoparticle exposure and risk. NanoImpact 1: 9-12.
  49. Vannini C, Domingo G, Onelli E, De Mattia F, Bruni I, et al. (2014) Phytotoxic and genotoxic effects of silver nanoparticles exposure on germinating wheat seedlings. Journal of plant physiology 171: 1142-1148
  50. Tripathi DK, Singh S, Singh S, Srivastava PK, Singh VP, et al. (2017) Nitric oxide alleviates silver nanoparticles (AgNps)-induced phytotoxicity in Pisum sativum seedlings. Plant physiology and biochemistry 110: 167-177.
  51. Cvjetko P, Milošić A, Domijan AM, Vrček IV, Tolić S, et al. (2017) Toxicity of silver ions and differently coated silver nanoparticles in Allium cepa roots. Ecotoxicology and environmental safety 137: 18-28.
  52. Song MF, Li YS, Kasai H, Kawai K (2011) Metal nanoparticle-induced micronuclei and oxidative DNA damage in mice. Journal of clinical biochemistry and nutrition 1202080139-1202080139.
  53. RIAHI MA, Rezaee F, Jalali V (2012) Effects of alumina nanoparticles on morphological properties and antioxidant system of Triticum aestivum.
  54. Raliya R, Tarafdar JC (2013) ZnO nanoparticle biosynthesis and its effect on phosphorous-mobilizing enzyme secretion and gum contents in Clusterbean (Cyamopsis tetragonoloba L.). Agricultural Research 2: 48-57.
  55. Li Q, Chen X, Zhuang J, Chen X (2016) Decontaminating soil organic pollutants with manufactured nanoparticles. Environmental Science and Pollution Research 23: 11533-11548.
  56. Patra P, Choudhury SR, Mandal S, Basu A, Goswami A, et al. (2013) Effect Sulfur and ZnO Nanoparticles on Stress Physiology and Plant (Vignaradiata) Nutrition. Advanced Nanomaterials and Nanotechnology 2013: 301-309.
  57. Samadi N, Yahyaabadi S, Rezayatmand Z (2014) Effect of TiO2 and TiO2 nanoparticle on germination, root and shoot Length and photosynthetic pigments of Mentha piperita. International Journal of Plant Soil Science 3: 408-418.
  58. 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.
  59. Ma X, Geiser-Lee J, Deng Y, Kolmakov A (2010) Interactions between engineered nanoparticles (ENPs) and plants: phytotoxicity, uptake and accumulation. Science of the total environment 408: 3053-3061.
  60. Lee WM, Kwak JI, An YJ (2012) Effect of silver nanoparticles in crop plants Phaseolus radiatus and Sorghum bicolor: media effect on phytotoxicity. Chemosphere 86: 491-499.
  61. Taylor AF, Rylott EL, Anderson CW, Bruce NC (2014) Investigating the toxicity, uptake, nanoparticle formation and genetic response of plants to gold. PLOS one 9: e93793.
  62. Priester JH, Moritz SC, Espinosa K, Ge, Y, Wang Y, Nisbet RM,  Holden PA (2017) Damage assessment for soybean cultivated in soil with either CeO2 or ZnO manufactured nanomaterials. Science of the Total Environment 579: 1756-1768.
  63.  Le Van N, Ma C, Shang J, Rui Y, Liu S, et al. (2016) Effects of CuO nanoparticles on insecticidal activity and phytotoxicity in conventional and transgenic cotton. Chemosphere 144: 661-670.
  64. Le Van N, Rui Y, Cao W, Shang J, Liu S, et al. (2016b) Toxicity and bio-effects of CuO nanoparticles on transgenic Ipt-cotton. Journal of Plant Interactions 11: 108-116.
  65. Kirschbaum MU (2011) Does enhanced photosynthesis enhance growth? Lessons learned from CO2 enrichment studies. Plant physiology 155: 117-124.
  66. Giraldo JP, Landry MP, Faltermeier SM, McNicholas TP, Iverson NM, Boghossian A A,  Strano MS (2014) Plant nanobionics approach to augment photosynthesis and biochemical sensing. Nature materials 13: 400.
  67. .Govorov AO, Carmeli I (2007) Hybrid structures composed of photosynthetic system and metal nanoparticles: plasmon enhancement effect. Nano letters 7: 620-625.
  68. . Shoults-Wilson WA, Reinsch BC, Tsyusko OV, Bertsch PM, Lowry GV, Unrine J M (2011) Effect of silver nanoparticle surface coating on bioaccumulation and reproductive toxicity in earthworms (Eisenia fetida). Nanotoxicology 5: 432-444.
  69.  Sagee O, Dror I, Berkowitz B (2012) Transport of silver nanoparticles (AgNPs) in soil. Chemosphere 88: 670-675.
  70. Waalewijn-Kool PL, Ortiz MD, Van Straalen NM, van Gestel CA (2013) Sorption, dissolution and pH determine the long-term equilibration and toxicity of coated and uncoated ZnO nanoparticles in soil. Environmental pollution 178: 59-64.
  71. Read DS, Matzke M, Gweon HS, Newbold LK, Heggelund L, et al. (2016) Soil pH effects on the interactions between dissolved zinc, non-nano-and nano-ZnO with soil bacterial communities. Environmental Science and Pollution Research 23: 4120-4128.
  72.  Pappa AM, Parlak O, Scheiblin G, Mailley P, Salleo A, et al. (2018) Organic electronics for point-of-care metabolite monitoring. Trends in biotechnology 36: 45-59.
  73. Sauvé S, Hendershot W, Allen HE (2000) Solid-solution partitioning of metals in contaminated soils: dependence on pH, total metal burden, and organic matter. Environmental science technology 34: 1125-1131.
  74.  Lowry GV, Espinasse BP, Badireddy AR, Richardson CJ, Reinsch BC, Bryant LD,  Colman BP (2012) Long-term transformation and fate of manufactured Ag nanoparticles in a simulated large scale freshwater emergent wetland. Environmental science technology 46: 7027-7036.
  75.  Schlich K, Klawonn T, Terytze K, Hund‐Rinke K (2013) Effects of silver nanoparticles and silver nitrate in the earthworm reproduction test. Environmental toxicology and chemistry32: 181-188.
  76.  Heggelund LR, Diez-Ortiz M, Lofts S, Lahive E, Jurkschat K, Wojnarowicz J,  Svendsen C (2014) Soil pH effects on the comparative toxicity of dissolved zinc, non-nano and nano ZnO to the earthworm Eisenia fetida. Nanotoxicology 8: 559-572.
  77. Aiken GR, Hsu-Kim H, Ryan JN (2011) Influence of dissolved organic matter on the environmental fate of metals, nanoparticles, and colloids. Environ Sci Technol 8: 3196-3201.
  78. Cupi D, Hartmann NB, Baun A (2015) The influence of natural organic matter and aging on suspension stability in guideline toxicity testing of silver, zinc oxide, and titanium dioxide nanoparticles with Daphnia magna. Environmental toxicology and chemistry 34: 497-506.
  79. Coutris C, Joner EJ, Oughton DH (2012) Aging and soil organic matter content affect the fate of silver nanoparticles in soil. Science of the Total Environment 420 :327-333.
  80. Kaiser JP, Diener L, Wick P (2013) Nanoparticles in paints: a new strategy to protect façades and surfaces. In Journal of Physics: Conference Series 429: p012036.
  81. Roh JY, Park YK, Park K, Choi J (2010) Ecotoxicological investigation of CeO2 and TiO2 nanoparticles on the soil nematode Caenorhabditis elegans using gene expression, growth, fertility, and survival as endpoints. Environmental toxicology and pharmacology 29: 167-172.
  82. Schlich K, Hund-Rinke K (2015) Influence of soil properties on the effect of silver nanomaterials on microbial activity in five soils. Environmental pollution 196: 321-330.
  83.  Liu J, Hurt RH (2010) Ion release kinetics and particle persistence in aqueous nano-silver colloids. Environmental science technology 44: 2169-2175.
  84.  Xu C, Peng C, Sun L, Zhang S, Huang H, et al. (2015) Distinctive effects of TiO2 and CuO nanoparticles on soil microbes and their community structures in flooded paddy soil. Soil Biology and Biochemistry 86: 24-33.
  85. Cao J, Feng Y, Lin X, Wang J (2016) Arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi alleviate the negative effects of iron oxide nanoparticles on bacterial community in rhizospheric soils. Frontiers in environmental science 4: 10.
  86. . Buzea C, Pacheco II, Robbie K (2007) Nanomaterials and nanoparticles: sources and toxicity. Biointerphases 2: 17.
  87. Solanki A, Kim JD, Lee KB (2008) Nanotechnology for regenerative medicine: nanomaterials for stem cell imaging. Nanomedicine 3: 567-578.
  88. Chai H, Yao J, Sun J, Zhang C, Liu W, et al. (2015) The effect of metal oxide nanoparticles on functional bacteria and metabolic profiles in agricultural soil. Bulletin of environmental contamination and toxicology 94: 490-495.
  89. Maliszewska I (2016) Effects of the biogenic gold nanoparticles on microbial community structure and activities. Annals of Microbiology 66: 785-794.
  90. Venkataraju JL, Sharath R, Chandraprabha MN, Neelufar E, Hazra A, et al. (2014) Synthesis, characterization and evaluation of antimicrobial activity of zinc oxide nanoparticles. Journal of Biochemical Technology 3: 151-154.
  91. Lofts S, Criel P, Janssen CR, Lock K, McGrath SP, et al. (2013) Modelling the effects of copper on soil organisms and processes using the free ion approach: Towards a multi-species toxicity model. Environmental pollution 178: 244-253.
  92. Pradhan A, Seena S, Pascoal C, Cássio F (2011) Can metal nanoparticles be a threat to microbial decomposers of plant litter in streams. Microbial ecology 62: 58-68.
  93. Ge Y, Schimel JP, Holden PA (2012) Identification of soil bacteria susceptible to TiO2 and ZnO nanoparticles. Appl Environ Microbiol 78:6749-6758.
  94. Hänsch M, Emmerling C (2010) Effects of silver nanoparticles on the microbiota and enzyme activity in soil. Journal of Plant Nutrition and Soil Science 173: 554-558.
  95. Tong M, Ding J, Shen Y, Zhu P (2010) Influence of biofilm on the transport of fullerene (C60) nanoparticles in porous media. Water research 44: 1094-1103.
  96. Petersen EJ, Huang Q, Weber Jr WJ (2008) Bioaccumulation of radio-labeled carbon nanotubes by Eisenia foetida. Environmental science technology 42: 3090-3095.
  97. Hu CW, Li M, Cui YB, Li DS, Chen J, et al. (2010) Toxicological effects of TiO2 and ZnO nanoparticles in soil on earthworm Eisenia fetida. Soil Biology and Biochemistry 42: 586-591.
  98. Coleman JG, Johnson DR, Stanley JK, Bednar AJ, Weiss Jr CA, et al. (2010) Assessing the fate and effects of nano aluminum oxide in the terrestrial earthworm, Eisenia fetida. Environmental toxicology and chemistry 29: 1575-1580.
  99. Kim E, Sun L, Gabel CV, Fang-Yen C (2013) Long-term imaging of Caenorhabditis elegans using nanoparticle-mediated immobilization. PloS one 8: e53419.

Editorial Information

Editor-in-Chief

Article Type

Mini Review

Publication history

Received date: June 24, 2019
Accepted date: August 27, 2019
Published date: August 30, 2019

Copyright

©2019 Javed Z. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

Citation

Zoya Javed, Kavya Dashora, Mansi Mishra, Vinayak D Fasake and Ayushi Srivastva (2019) Effect of accumulation of nanoparticles in soil health- a concern on future. Front Nanosci Nanotech 5: DOI: 10.15761/FNN.1000182

Corresponding author

Zoya Javed

Research Scholar, Center for Rural development and technology, IIT Delhi, India

E-mail : bhuvaneswari.bibleraaj@uhsm.nhs.uk

Figure 1. An Overview of Effect of nanoparticles on Soil Health

Figure 2. Nanotechnology and its relation with other fields

Figure 3. Different types of Nanoparticles.

Table 1. Types of nanoparticles and their uses.

CLASS

TYPES

USES

 

 

 

Metallic

Silver (Ag)

Drug delivery, Water Treatment, Electronic

Gold (Au)

Cancer diagnosis, DNA fingerprinting, Stem cell detection

Titanium dioxide (TiO2)

Food additive, Water purification, medical application

Zincoxide (ZnO)

Cosmetics, Drug delivery, biosensors.

Copper (Cu)

Electronics, catalyst, medicine, bioanalysis

 

Carbon-based

Fullerene

Drug carrier, medical imaging

Graphene

Cancer therapy, tissue engineering, bioimaging, drug delivery.

Silica-based

SiO2

Biosensor, Drug Additives

Polymeric/

Organic

Chitosan poly (lactidoco-glycolide), polyacrylate

Drug delivery

Table 2. Effect of nanoparticles on the physiological changes in plants.

Types of Nanoparticle

Concentration

Physiological changes

References

TiO2

10-2000 mg/l

Exposure of Lemna minor to TiO2 NPs increased the activities of various enzymes (POD, SOD, and CAT) below concentration of 200 mg/l because of eliminating accumulated reactive oxygen species in plant cells.

Song et al. (2012) [52]

Al2O3

10-1000 mg/l

The activity of SOD and CAT were increased with the  treatments of Al2O3 NPs at a concentration of 200 and 500 mg/l.

Riahi-Madvar et al. (2012) [53]

ZnO

10 mg/l

Treatment of cluster bean with foliar sprays of ZnO NPs caused a significant increase in chlorophyll content (276.2 %), total soluble leaf protein (27.1%), acid phosphatase (73.5%), alkaline phosphatase (48.7%), and phytase (72.4%) over control.

Raliya and Tarafdar (2013) [54]

Fe2O3

20 mg/l

Increase in root activity, activity of catalase, peroxidase, superoxide dismutase, chlorophyll, malondialdehyde  contents, ferric reductase activity, the root apoplastic iron content were recorded by the translocation of the significant amount of Fe2O3 NPs suspended in a liquid medium to various tissues of plants.

Li et al. (2016) [55]

SNP

ZnO

 

500-4,000 ppm

Application of various concentrations of both sulfur and zinc oxide nanoparticles in significantly increase the total lipids, proteins, amino acids, thiol and chlorophyll contents compared to untreated control but no significance difference has been observed among the treatments with various concentrations for both nanoparticles.

Patra et al. (2013) [56]

TiO2

200 mg/l

Application of TiO2 NPs had a noticeable effect on chlorophyll a and b and carotenoid contents on Mentha.

Samadi et al. (2014) [57]

Table 3. Effect of nanoparticles on plant species and their metabolism

Nanoparticles

Size range

Plant

Biological effects

Reference

 

 

 

 

 

 

Ag

1–10 mg L1

Triticum aestivum L.

Adversely affect seedling growth and

Vannini et al. 2014

1000–3000 mM

Pisum sativum L.

chlorophyll fluorescence

Tripathi et al. 2017

 

Allium cepa

Caused oxidative stress and exhibited toxicity

Cvjetko et al. 2017

5–25 nm; 0–40 mg L1

 

 

Phaseolus radiatus,

 

 

Higher accumulation in roots and shoots.

Lee et al. 2012 [60]

Au

25–100 mg L

Arabidopsis thaliana,

Root length reduced by 75%. Accumulation

Taylor et al. 2014 [61]

CeO2 ZnO

0.05–0.5 g kg1 soil

Glycine max

Increased ROS, lipid peroxidation, visible

Priester et al. 2017 [62]

CuO                             

0–1000 mg L1

Conventional and

Inhibited the growth, development, nutrient

Van et al. 2016a [63]

200–500 mg L1

Ipt-cotton

Height and root length decreased, increased

Van et al. 2016b [64]

Table 4. Effect of nanoparticles on soil microbial community and enzymes.

Nanomaterials

Major effect

References

Au

Hinderance in enzymatic activities of soil

 Asadishad et al., 2017

TiO2

The loss in diversity of the bacterial community

Ge et al., 2012 [92]

Cu

Decreases C, N Biomass

Kumar et al.,2012 [93]

Ag

Loss of microbial community, hindrance in enzymatic activities

Peyrote et al.,2014;

Colman et al., 2013

Mixture of Cu and Fe

Loss of microbial community

Ben-Mosey et al.,2013

Mixture of Co, Fe, Ni and Ag

Not much effect on the soil community

Shah et al., 2014

Ag

β-Glucosidase, acid phosphatase, dehydrogenase, Urease

 Hnsch and Emmerling, 2010 [94]

C60

eucine-aminopeptidase, β-cellobiohydrolase, acid phosphatase, β-Glucosidase, chitinase, xylosidase

Tong et al., 2007 [95]

Table 5. Effect of nanoparticles on soil nematodes community

Test Nanoparticles

Test species

Author/Year

MWNT, SWNT

Eisenia foetida

 Petersen et al., 2008 [96]

 

Tio2, ZnO

Eisenia foetida

 Hu et al.,2010 [97]

Al2O3

Eisenia foetida

Coleman et al.,2010 [98]

Pt

Caenorhabditis elegans

Kim et al., 2013 [99]

Ag

Caenorhabditis elegans

   Roh et al., 2009

ZnO

Caenorhabditis elegans

   Ma et al., 2009

CeO2, TiO2

Caenorhabditis elegans

   Roh et al., 2010