







































 
 

 

203 
© 2024 by the authors; licensee Asian Online Journal Publishing Group 
 

Agriculture and Food Sciences Research 
Vol. 11, No. 2, 203-221, 2024 

ISSN(E) 2411-6653/ ISSN(P) 2518-0193 
DOI: 10.20448/aesr.v11i2.6253 

© 2024 by the authors; licensee Asian Online Journal Publishing Group 

 
 

 

 
 
 
Nanotechnology: A double-edged sword for future smart agriculture and 
phytopathological management in plants 

 
Dipan Adhikari1   

Parvin Khatun2   

Satyajit Koley3   

Moutushi Sen4   

Sudip Kumar Ghosh5   

 

 
( Corresponding Author) 

 
1,2,3,4UG and PG Department of Botany, Hooghly Mohsin College, Hooghly, West Bengal (712 101), India. 
1Email: dipanadhikari@gmail.com  
2Email: parvin0khatun1996@gmail.com  
3Email: satyajitkoley87249@gmail.com  
4Email: moutushisen7@gmail.com 
5Department of Economics, Bidhannagar Govt. College, Sector-1, EB-, Salt Lake, Kolkata, India. 
 5Email: sudipkumarghosh919@gmail.com  

 
Abstract 

Modern technology that would boost agricultural outputs might therefore preserve the country's 
sustainable living standards by enhancing food security. With nanotechnology, it’s possible to 
produce foods of exceptional quality that also could increase the bioavailability of nutrients during 
the third decade of the twenty-first century which found usage in a variety of industries such as 
medical science, pharmaceuticals, food, and energy conservation. Nanotechnology is the synthesis, 
designing, characterizing, and utilization of assemblies, tools, and systems via directing the 
morphology and size variation at nanometer level (1 - 100 nm). Nanochemicals, nanopesticides, 
and nanofertilizers do increase yielding capacity without damaging agricultural land or irrigation 
water. Nanomaterials (NMs) are aimed protect crops from pests, microbial and fungal pathogens 
thereby lowering nutrient losses. Nanotechnology holds the potential to monitor soil quality in 
agricultural fields and sense crop health. Metallic Nanoparticles (Cu, Zn, Ni, Zn Fe, Ag, Al, Ti, 
and Al) can impinge on plant development, metabolism, and stress tolerance. This paper examines 
the role that nanoparticles (NPs) be playing while regulating oxidative stress, ROS turnover to 
mitigate abiotic stress in plants thereby emphasizing the advantages and of nanotechnology for 
better sustenance of future agriculture practices. 

 
Keywords: Agriculture, Food security, Nano chemicals, Nanotoxicology and nano sensors, Oxidative burst, and ROS. 

 
Citation | Adhikari, D., Khatun, P., Koley, S., Sen, M., & Ghosh, S. 
K. (2024). Nanotechnology: A double-edged sword for future smart 
agriculture and phytopathological management in plants. Agriculture 
and Food Sciences Research, 11(2), 203–221. 10.20448/aesr.v11i2.6253 
History:  
Received: 18 November 2024 
Revised: 20 December 2024 
Accepted: 23 December 2024 
Published: 26 December 2024 

Licensed: This work is licensed under a Creative Commons 

Attribution 4.0 License  
Publisher: Asian Online Journal Publishing Grou 

Funding:  This study received no specific financial support.    
Institutional Review Board Statement: Not applicable. 
Transparency: The authors confirm that the manuscript is an honest, 
accurate, and transparent account of the study; that no vital features of the 
study have been omitted; and that any discrepancies from the study as planned 
have been explained. This study followed all ethical practices during writing. 
Competing Interests: The authors declare that they have no competing 
interests. 
Authors’ Contributions: All authors contributed equally to the conception 
and design of the study. All authors have read and agreed to the published 
version of the manuscript. 

 
Contents 
1. Introduction .................................................................................................................................................................................... 204 
2. The World of Nano-Agrochemicals ........................................................................................................................................... 204 
3. Synthesis of Nanoparticles ........................................................................................................................................................... 206 
4. Employment of Nanoparticles Designed for Plant Disease Management ......................................................................... 207 
5. Plant Disease Control and Management: Applications of Nanomaterials ......................................................................... 207 
6. Bio-Efficacy of Metallic NPs against Plant Pathogens .......................................................................................................... 207 
7. Nanoparticles as “Strategic Weapons” against Plant Pathogens - the Mechanism of Action ....................................... 210 
8. Cellular Uptake and Mechanism of Nano-Toxicity ................................................................................................................ 210 
9. Cellular Toxicity via DNA Damage by Nanoparticles ........................................................................................................... 211 
10. Nanomaterials and Regulation of Oxidative Stress .............................................................................................................. 211 
11. Production and Inter Switching of Reactive Oxygen Species in Microbial Cells .......................................................... 212 

mailto:dipanadhikari@gmail.com
mailto:parvin0khatun1996@gmail.com
mailto:satyajitkoley87249@gmail.com
mailto:moutushisen7@gmail.com
mailto:sudipkumarghosh919@gmail.com
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
https://www.doi.org/10.20448/aesr.v11i2.6253
https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3126-7210
https://orcid.org/0009-0005-8664-4599
https://orcid.org/0009-0007-9339-9370
https://orcid.org/0009-0002-5339-1458
https://orcid.org/0009-0008-9459-1046


Agriculture and Food Sciences Research, 2024, 11(2): 203-221 

204 
© 2024 by the authors; licensee Asian Online Journal Publishing Group 

 

 

12. Mechanisms of NP Uptake by Higher Plants ........................................................................................................................ 212 
13. How Nanomaterials (NMs) would emerge as ‘Nano-Weapons’ against Phytopathogens? ........................................... 213 
14. Environmental Risk Assessment of NPs ................................................................................................................................. 214 
15. Bacteria and Fungi Play Crucial Roles in Promoting Plant Growth through Various Mechanisms in Natural 
Environment ........................................................................................................................................................................................ 214 
16. Bacterial Nano-Toxicity by ENPs ............................................................................................................................................ 215 
17. Protozoal Nano-Toxicity out of ENPs Accumulation ......................................................................................................... 215 
18. Nano-Toxicity of Fungi out of ENPs Accumulation ............................................................................................................ 215 
19. Harmful Effects of Nanoparticles (NPs) on Earthworms .................................................................................................... 215 
20. Biochemical Pathways Leading to Toxicity of Soil Microflora and Macrofauna: Oxidative Stress and Cellular 
Death Occurrence after ENPs Exposure ....................................................................................................................................... 215 
21. Sensing and Detection and Plant Pathogens in Agricultural Crops through Nanomaterials (NMs) ......................... 216 
22. Nanotechnology Mediated Detection of Plant Pathogens at Early Stages of Infections ............................................. 216 
23. Challenges and Limitations of Nanosensors .......................................................................................................................... 216 
24. Conclusion and Future Perspectives for Future Smart Agriculture ................................................................................. 217 
References ............................................................................................................................................................................................ 218 
 

 
Contribution of this paper to the literature 
When applied to plant tissues, nanoparticles can be engineered to enhance resistance to 
pathogens by inducing the creation of defensive chemicals, which in turn stimulates a plant's 
inherent defense mechanisms. Before being widely used, nanoparticles' potential harm to non-
target creatures, such as helpful bacteria and pollinators, needs to be carefully assessed. 

 
1. Introduction 

Nanotechnology is the "synthesis, designing, characterizing, and utilizing of assemblies, tools, and systems" 
[1] through tailored morphology and size variation on the nanoscale from 1 to 100 nm. The one nanometre is 

defined as one billionth (10−9) of a metre which is a hint that technology can be used at that size scale. Nanoscience 
and nanotechnologies are deemed novel strategies in developmental study relating to the discovery of miracles and 
the action of substances on the atomic, molecular, or macromolecular scales, at which their capabilities differ 
considerably from those at the bulk stage. In this case, the physical, chemical, and biological properties of final 
materials and the bulk material are very different. Changes to properties resulting from working at the nanoscale 
lead to the introduction of novel materials with interesting architectures, advanced tools and additional beneficial 
products. Increase use of "nanoscience" "nanotechnology" by scientists to create nanomaterials (NMs) with a 
plethora of physical, chemical and biological strategies has contributed to the discipline of "nanoscience" and 
"nanotechnology" as per Zhao, et al. [2].All of these techniques have a few drawbacks regarding isolation and 
purification of nanoparticles from smilarity micro emulsions and the high use of surfactants. One kind of green 
technology that is useful is, simple to implement, fast, environmentally friendly, and time–efficient is the 
development of nanoparticles (NPs) from plant cell extraction. Figure 1, is showing various ways that eco-friendly 
formulated NPs that can enhance sustainability and the possibilities for agriculture areas, such as improved 
fertilization, less toxic environmental contaminants, as improved PGRs, and improved pesticides. Among other 
aspects of daily life, nanomaterials (NMs) are extensively utilized in industry, medicine, pharmaceuticals, and crop 
protection for sustainable agriculture. Oxidative stress is one type of situation where the excessive creation of 
reactive oxygen species (ROS) affects the cell's redox balance. NMs can cause oxidative stress, but they can also 
ameliorate it, which can lead to phytotoxicity [3]. Plant cells often accumulate ROS through a variety of 
mechanisms, including environmental stress [4] and stress from heavy metal build-ups [5-7]. The most frequently 
reported cases have been biotic stress, salinity stress [8] and physiochemical-cum-allelopathy-induced stress [9]. 
Oxidative stress produces reactive oxygen species (ROS), which harm biological materials by altering their 
structural and functional characteristics and inducing genotoxicity [10] coupled with altered plant metabolism and 
ultimately triggers cellular death via both short-range and long-range apoptotic signaling cascades [11-13]. (This 
whole paragraph is rewritten as per instructions) 

Plants frequently produce heat shock proteins (HSPs), which function as chaperones and are crucial in granting 
biotic and abiotic stress resistance, in order to combat different levels of biotic and abiotic stress cum signaling 
cascades both in cellular and organelles microcosm. Additionally, by favorably influencing the antioxidant enzyme 
systems in plants, HSPs usually decrease the levels of reactive oxygen species (ROS) and increase membrane 
stability. In addition, it employs ROS as a signal to molecules to stimulate HSP production. HSP also improves 
plant immunity by accumulating and stabilizing pathogenesis-related (PR) proteins under a variety of biotic 
stressors[14]. Therefore, the purpose behind this study is to provide light on how NMs, such as nanopesticides, 
nanochemicals and nanofertilizers, are used in agricultural soil to promote the safe growth and development of 
both cash and food crops. This chapter also discusses how NMs control oxidative stress in plants and how plants 
use antioxidants as defense mechanisms [15] to rid of themselves from reactive oxygen species. 
 

2. The World of Nano-Agrochemicals 
2.1. Nanopesticides 

Because they keep pests (including rodents, ants, mice, cockroaches, aphids, crickets, and caterpillars) under 
control and preserve crop growth and development, pesticides are essential to agriculture. The term 
"nanopesticide" describes pesticides that are applied as agrochemical ingredients (AcIs) that have two or three 
dimensions and a nanostructure that ranges from 1 to 200 nm. The technique of enclosing active molecules in a 
nanoscale protective shell is known as nanoencapsulation (Figure 1). Effective pest management uses 
nanoencapsulated pesticides, although residue accumulation must be avoided. Various forms of copper oxide-based 
nanomaterials (CuONPs), zinc oxide-based nanopesticides (ZnONPs), magnesium hydroxide-based nanopesticides 
(MgOHNPs), and magnesium oxide-based nanopesticides (MgONPs) were developed to control pathogenic and 



Agriculture and Food Sciences Research, 2024, 11(2): 203-221 

205 
© 2024 by the authors; licensee Asian Online Journal Publishing Group 

 

 

pest attack. Manufacturers of pesticides are increasingly using encapsulated nanopesticides. Light, humidity, and 
temperature are examples of environmental factors that can cause them to release the active components in a 
regulated way [16]. 
 
2.2. Nanofungicides 

The primary reason for the reduction in crop yields and profits is fungal infections. Therefore, it is essential to 
concentrate on creating fungicides that have an inhibitory activity in order to control fungal diseases that are lethal 
for food crops and to essentially protect and extend the shelf life of harvested commodities. Currently, 
nanofungicides are highly sought after due to their superior solubility, permeability, low dose requirement, and low 
phytotoxicity.These substances can be used to treat plant diseases and are both safe and environmentally friendly. 
NPs increase a plant's resilience to illness by activating its defenses or rendering microbes incapable of surviving. 
The antifungal properties of nanoparticles can help in the development of pesticides based on them [17]. Due to its 
many advantages over other nanoparticles, such as Cu, Zn, Au, Zno, Al2O3, and TiO2, numerous researchers have 
thoroughly studied the manufacturing of silver nanoparticles. Nanofungicides that are representative of the 
environment are favored over non-target areas or organisms that could potentially reduce soil fertility and 
sustainability either directly or indirectly. 

 

2.3. Nanoinsecticides 
On agricultural land, chemicals called insecticides are being sprayed to either kill insects or prevent them from 

acting destructively toward crop plants. However, many chemicals are extremely harmful and toxic to biological 
sources as well as aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems. Modern nanoscience research is now creating 
nanotechnology-based botanical insecticides with active components made from essential oils or plant extracts 
[18]. For instance, organic extracts from different plant materials like neem leaf (Azadirachta indica A. Juss) , leaf 
decoction of Citrus limon [(L.) Osbeck], extracts of acacia gum (Acacia Senegal (L.) Wild and peels poweder of 
pomegranate (Punica granatum L.) were used in the green synthesis of MgOH [19, 20]. Experiment demonstrates 
that, in addition to their pesticidal activities [21] these botanical nanopesticides have a significant impact on plant 
growth and development that would boost high-yield organic farming during field trials [22]. 

 

 
Figure 1. Schematic flow chart of different classes of nanomaterials (NMs) shows wider applications for sustainable agriculture. 



Agriculture and Food Sciences Research, 2024, 11(2): 203-221 

206 
© 2024 by the authors; licensee Asian Online Journal Publishing Group 

 

 

3. Synthesis of Nanoparticles 
Using a variety of processes, including chemical, biological and physical, nanoparticles can be manufactured 

which have been aimed to be environmentally safe, biodegradable but reproducible in activities, with lower toxicity, 
higher efficacy and upholding strong antimicrobial, antifungal, antibacterial and antiviral characteristics. These 
qualities vary depending on the techniques of production (Figure 1). The environmentally friendly methods (Green 
synthesis) of producing nanoparticles from plant extracts and with active molecules from biological 
microorganisms [23] had been a great initiative to its truest sense. These methods are pollutant-free, 
environmentally beneficial and eventually would produce to little toxic waste [24]. Recently, TiO2 NPs were 
produced utilizing Carica papaya [25]. Microorganisms such as bacterial and fungal cells are referred to as "bio-
reactors" in the context of nanoparticle manufacturing [26]. 

Figure 2 Illustrates the synthesis of different various formulations used for types of different Nano-particles for 
commercial uses reported till date. 

 

 
Figure 2. Synthesis of different types of different Nano-particles reported till date. 

 

3.1. Biological Methods 
3.1.1. By Plant Extracts 

Recently, many ways to synthesizing nanoparticles from plant extracts have been explored. Plant-derived 
nanoparticles are becoming increasingly important in biological applications. Copper nanoparticles (Cu NPs) can be 
biosynthesized from Magnolia sp, Syzygium aromaticum and Zinziber officinale plant extracts [27]. Azadirachta indica 
and Citrus lemon were employed to synthesize gold-based nanoparticles (AuNPs) and silver-based nanoparticles 
(AgNPs) [28]. 

Table 1 Illustrates the Biosynthesized Nanparticles  that are currently binging in us employing different  plant extracts. 

 
Table 1. Biosynthesized Nanparticles by using plant extract. 

Bio-Synthesized 
nanoparticles 

Plant extract  
 

Plant extract  
 

References 
 

CuO NPs Magnoliasp, Syzygium aromaticum and 
Zinziber officinale  

Antibacterial  
 

Yaqub, et al. [29] and Yashwant, et 
al. [30] 

Au NPs Eclipta alba, Nepenthes khasiana Antibacterial  
 

Zhang, et al. [31] and Bhau, et al. 
[32] 

AgNO3 NPs Azadirachta indica, Musa acuminate 
peel  

Antibacterial Kumari, et al. [33] and Maruthai, et 
al. [34] 

TiO2 NPs Carica papaya Antifungal Saka, et al. [25] 

Fe2O3 NPs Mentha spicata Antibacterial, 
cytotoxic and 
anticancerous 

Umar, et al. [35] 

 

3.1.2. By Microorganisms 
Verticillium sp., Phomasp., Fusarium oxysporum, Phaenerochaetechrysosporium and Aspergilus flavusare some 

instances of fungi that are used to make silver nanoparticles. (AgNO3-NPs) [36]. However, some microorganisms, 
such as Clostridium versicolor and Bacillus subtilis, are additionally employed in the synthesis of silver nanoparticles 
(AgNO3-NPs) [37]. Plant viral capsids are also employed as bio-templates for nanoparticle synthesis, such as 
Tobacco Mosaic Virus (TMV), which is used to biosynthesise Ag and Ni NPs. 
 
3.2. Chemical Methods 

There are several commercial chemical methods for synthesis ofNPs that incorporated chemical reduction, 
microemulsion and electrochemical sapproaches [38]. Michael Faraday initially discovered the chemical reduction 
process in 1857. This approach is excellent for producing nanosized copper nanoparticles (Cu NPs). On the other 



Agriculture and Food Sciences Research, 2024, 11(2): 203-221 

207 
© 2024 by the authors; licensee Asian Online Journal Publishing Group 

 

 

hand, the electrochemical approach is utilized to create metal nanoparticles. It is accomplished by sending an 
electric current between electrodes. 
 

4. Employment of Nanoparticles Designed for Plant Disease Management 
4.1. Cytoprotectant Nanoparticles 

Applied directly to seeds, leaves, or roots, nanoparticles, which have a size range of 10 to 100 nm, have special 
properties that shield plants against pests and diseases. An extensive investigation has been conducted into the 
antibacterial, antifungal, and antiviral properties of metal nanoparticles, employing copper, silver, zinc oxide, and 
titanium dioxide. Silver nanoparticles, particularly those produced using "green synthesis," have shown significant 
antifungal effectiveness against a range of fungal-infections and decreased the risk of viral infection. Silver-based 
nanoparticles provide challenges in terms of manufacturing, toxic interactions against soil-borne, growth-
promoting rhizospheric flora. Other routinely used metal nanoparticles, such as copper and titanium dioxide, are 
being investigated for their antibacterial properties. Furthermore, chitosan nanoparticles have good biological 
characteristics and have rendered viral resistance and antibacterial activity against a variety of diseases. Chitosan 
has the ability to function as both solitary nanoparticles and nanocarriers for increased delivery [39]. 
 
4.2. Anti- Fungal and Fungal-Like Pathogen Killer Nanoparticles 

Nanotechnology provides promising options for treating fungal diseases in plants through a variety of ways, 
including detection, nutrition augmentation, nano-fungicide transporters and direct impacts of nanoparticles (NPs) 
on fungal pathogens. Nanoscale nutrients, such as copper, when coupled with other elements, have been proven to 
increase plant nutrient uptake and immune responses to fungal diseases. Standard copper-based fungicides (such 
copper oxide, copper sulphate, copper oxychloride, dicopper chloride trihydrate, cuprous oxide, copper octanoate, 
copper sulfide, and copper hydroxide) have been replaced by copper-based nanomaterials, displaying superior 
efficacy in reducing fungal symptoms and boosting crop output [40]. Furthermore, nanomaterials mixed with 
organic chemicals, such as chitosan-coated iron oxide NPs, have demonstrated efficacy in suppressing post-harvest 
fungal infections on fruits and vegetables [41]. Furthermore, nanomaterials mixed with organic chemicals, such as 
chitosan-coated iron oxide NPs, have demonstrated efficacy in suppressing post-harvest fungal infections on fruits 
and vegetables [41]. Nanoencapsulation of fungicides in particles such as mesoporous organosilica has 
demonstrated enhanced efficiency and stability, resulting in considerable decreases in fungal lesion sizes when 
compared to established fungicides [42]. These nanotechnology-based techniques provide a secure and more 
effectual method of addressing fungal diseases in agriculture. 
 

5. Plant Disease Control and Management: Applications of Nanomaterials  
Pesticides and herbicides of various varieties have long been used to control disease. The application of 

nanoparticles in the management of plant diseases has shown to be highly advantageous in the long run. 
Nanotechnology offers several methods of controlling plant disease. Nanotechnology has made significant advances 
in plant disease management. In the future, it might be used to diagnose diseases caused by bacteria, viruses, fungi, 
insect pests, pathogenic nematodes and so on. It might well be utilized as a diagnostic tool for diseases caused by 
bacteria, viruses, fungus and insects. These can be used as biosensors and nano-analytical instruments. 
Nanoparticles have the potential to offer protection against bacteria, viruses, insects and fungi. Different metallic 
NPs like, Ag, Cu, ZnO and TiO2 exhibit strong antibacterial and antifungal activities [43]. Different types of 
nanoparticles (both metallic and green) are used in the management of disease in plants. All things considered, 
nanoparticles with a variety of modes of action and applications for various pathogens and crops provide potential 
answers for managing plant diseases brought on by bacteria, fungus, and viruses. 
 

6. Bio-Efficacy of Metallic NPs against Plant Pathogens 
6.1. Zn NPs (Zinc Nanoparticles)  

Because of their low toxicity, zinc nanoparticles (Zn NPs) can be used to treat a wide range of illnesses. It 
possesses viricidal and bactericidal effects. Numerous pathogenic fungus, such as Mucor plumbeus, Botrytis cinerea, 
and Penicillium expansum, have been demonstrated to be effectively combatted by zinc nanoparticles (Zn NPs) [44]. 
The antifungal and antibacterial properties of zinc oxide nanoparticles (ZnO NPs) against pathogens including 
Pseudomonas aeruginosa and Botrytis cinerea have piqued curiosity. Their simple synthesis and photocatalytic actions 
on plant pathogenic fungi make them useful for disease management and detection [45]. Significant antibacterial 
actions against bacteria, fungus, and spores have been demonstrated by zinc oxide nanoparticles that makes them 
useful in the treatment of disease. Pathogen growth is finally inhibited by these nanoparticles, which also might 
bring forth oxidative stress, damage pathogen cell structure, and prevent DNA replication. Thanks to their 
exceptional catalytic, optical, and physical properties, zinc (Zn) nanoparticles—in particular, ZnO NPs—are widely 
employed in a variety of industries, including food, medicines, chemicals, and agriculture. Sclerotinia sclerotiorum, 
Penicillium expansumand Staphylococcus aureus are some examples of bacterial and fungal pathogens which are being 
inhibited to grow vegetatively. They also display concentration-dependent micronutrient releasing characteristics 
[45]. 
 
6.2. AgNPs: (Silver Nanoparticles) 

Silver NPS are the most effective ones. It exhibits antibacterial, antiviral, nematocidal and antifungal properties 
reported till date. Silver nanoparticles (Ag NPs) have been found to have viricidal activity, shielding the Faba bean 
plant from BYMV. Tomato Mosaic Virus (ToMV) and Potato Mosaic Virus (PMV) resistance had been reported to 
be effectively provided out of foliar spraying of silver nanoparticles (Ag NPs). Additionally, it had been proved that 
AgNPs have a viricidal effect on the Banana Bunchy Top Virus (BBTV), as seen by the decreased viral infection in 
banana plants treated with AgNPs. It has the ability to inhibit the growth of E. coli, P. aeruginosa, Staphylococcus 
aureus and Bacillus subtilis. When applied to Staphylococcus aureus it had exhibited strong antibacterial and 



Agriculture and Food Sciences Research, 2024, 11(2): 203-221 

208 
© 2024 by the authors; licensee Asian Online Journal Publishing Group 

 

 

antimicrobial properties [46]. According to Yakout and Mostafa [47] poisonous bacteria like Xanthomonas 
axonopodis and Phytoplasma aurantifolia can be identified with the use of silver nanoparticles (AgNPs), which 
effectively would change color to brown rapidly from yellow. Silver nanoparticles are effective in treating illnesses 
like Sun Hemp Rosette Virus (SHRV) in Cyamopsis tetragonoloba and late blight in tomatoes because they have 
shown efficiency against a variety of pathogens, encompassing different genera of viruses and fungi. The unique 
structure, size, and electrical/optical activity of silver nanoparticles (Ag NPs) make them interesting antibacterial 
and antifungal agents. They affect membrane integrity, cause cellular content leakage and do prevent pathogens 
from producing ATP and adhering to cell membranes. Furthermore, they oxidize lipids and proteins, cause cellular 
and ROS-mediated cytotoxicity, altering phosphotyrosine levels that would harm mitochondria [48]. Ag NPs have 
been shown to effectively suppress the growth of numerous bacterial and fungal infections, including dangerous 
species like Bipolarissorokiniana and Magnaporthe grisea. Additionally, they reduce the titers of tobacco mosaic virus 
(TMV) and bean yellow mosaic virus (BYMV) in afflicted plants. Strong antibacterial action was demonstrated by 
silver nanoparticles (Ag-NPs) made from plants such as Azadirachta indica (neem, Meliaceae) and Calligonum 
comosoum (arta, fire bush, Polygonaceae) [49] against plant bacterial and fungal diseases.Ag-NPs also shown 
antifungal action against different crop diseases and nematicidal activity against root-knot nematodes, indicating 
their potential for surface sterilizing of diseased seeds without compromising seed germination. On perennial 
ryegrass, silver nanoparticles effectively decreased leaf spot and gray leaf spot without causing any phytotoxicity 
and greatly decreased their antifungal activity. AgNPs would successfully produce relief following conidial 
inoculation, reducing diseases that differed significantly between three hours before and twenty-four hours after 
the treatments. When compared to the water control, the majority of silver formulations administered to plants 
three hours prior to spore inoculation considerably reduced both phytotoxicity and pathological symptoms. The 
most successful pre-inoculations were those with AgNO3 (25 and 50 ppm), Ag(p) (200 ppm), and Ag(e) (50 ppm), 
which allowed for less than 7% foliar damage by B. sorokiniana and M. grisea in extremely disease-conducive 
environmental circumstances, whereas control plants treated with water suffered more than 70% damage. On the 
other hand, more than 50% of the foliar damage was caused by the inability of delayed treatments of silver 
preparations 24 hours after spore inoculation to effectively reduce both diseases. Silver ions were thought to be 
very effective after prolonged release because they inhibit microbial respiration and metabolism in addition to 
causing physical injury inside the cellular microcosm [46]. 

 

6.3. FeNPs (Iron Nanoparticles) 
Iron nanoparticles (Fe2O3 NPs) are less harmful and therefore suitable for everyday use. It is highly reactive 

and has antiviral properties against TMV. Khan, et al. [50] revealed that Fe2O3 NPs have the capacity to limit the 
proliferation of Phytophthora infestations. Iron oxide (Fe2O3) NPs and magnesium oxide (MgO) NPs also 
demonstrate antibacterial efficacy against various pathogens, with smaller NPs showing higher penetration and 
effectiveness. 
 
6.4. NiNPs (Nickel Nanoparticles) 

Cucumber plants treated with Ni NPs exhibited antiviral action, as well as an increase in leaf count and dry 
weight. When treating Staphylococcus aureus (exhibiting Methicillin-resistance) infections, it exhibited antibacterial 
efficacy. Ni NPs had been made from an organic extract of the Ocimum sanctum plant and exhibit antibacterial 
effectiveness against Bacillus subtilis and E. coli [51]. 
 
6.5. TiONPs (Titanium Nanoparticles) 

It possesses the ability to oxidize biomolecules, which contributes to its significant antiviral activity. It has 
been found that treating Vicia faba L. with TiO2 NPs reduces viral infection caused by Broad Bean Stain Virus 
(BBSV) [52]. Strong antibacterial activity against bacterial phytopathogens and viruses, such as Turnip Mosaic 
Virus (TuMV), had been demonstrated by titanium dioxide (TiO2) nanoparticles (NPs) produced using sustainable 
methods (TuMV) [53]. 
 
6.6. Gold Nanoparticles 

Because of their physiochemical characteristics, they have high antibacterial actions. Thus, AuNPs have been 
employed as biosensor components to diagnose various types and intensity of different plant disease. Using the 
Surface Plasmone Resonance (SPR) method, Au NPs play a crucial role in identifying the pathogen causing Wheat 
Kernel Bunt disease, as well as late blight of potato and tomato caused by Phytophthora infestation using an Au NP-
based Lateral Flow Strip Biosensor [54]. Au nanoparticles were utilized as the detecting tags for 
phytopathologists during field trials of cash crops. Gold nanoparticles (AuNPs) have been widely used in numerous 
detection technologies, including strip-based DNA sensors for bacterial and viral infections. They also provide 
extremely immunospecific sensors for specific infections such as Leptosphaeria maculans and Pseudocercosporafijiensis 
[54]. AuNPs enhance the detection of viruses utilizing DNA hybridization assays and Label-Free Colorimetric 
Biosensing Techniques, such as Cucumber Green Mottle Mosaic Virus (CGMMV) [55]. Gold nanoparticles 
exhibit potent antifungal properties against pathogens like Aspergillus flavus and Aspergillus niger and they have 
been utilized in combating wheat stem rust and other fungal diseases. 
 
6.7. CuNPs (Copper Nanoparticles) 

It has excellent potential for plant disease control with strong wide spectrum antibacterial actions. Fungicides made 
from Cu NPs had been having the capability to avert the growth of Phytophthora infestations. Cu NP-based Bordeax 
mixtures lowered the Xiphinema index. According to reports, Cu NPs have had antibacterial activity against 
Xanthomonas compestrispv. vesicatoriain tomatoes [56]. Phomopsis sclerotioides, the causal source of cucumber root rot 
disease, was inhibited most effectively by CuO NPs [57]. Copper nanoparticles (CuNPs) are used in nano-
biosensors to quantify salicylic acid, which is a molecular marker of biotic stress for several plant diseases such as 
mungbean leaf spot and bacterial blight disease [58]. Owing to the antibacterial characteristics of copper 



Agriculture and Food Sciences Research, 2024, 11(2): 203-221 

209 
© 2024 by the authors; licensee Asian Online Journal Publishing Group 

 

 

nanoparticles, the development of bacteria like Escherichia coli and Staphylococcus aureus as well as fungus like 
Phytophthora infestans had been effectively inhibited. Copper nanoparticles (Cu NPs) exhibit antifungal capabilities, 
especially when combined with nanochitosan. Copper oxide (CuO) NPs were mainly explored for managing plant 
bacteria demonstrating high bactericidal activities against pathogens like Escherichia coli and Staphylococcus aureus 
(MRSA, methicillin-resistant) [59]. 

Figure 3 Describes the different Classes of synthesized nanoparticles using metallic and non-metallic inorganic 
components. 

 

 
Figure 3. Classes of synthesized nanoparticles. 

 

6.8. MgNPs (Magnesium Nanoparticles) 
When it comes to broad-range both Gram-positive and Gram-negative bactericidal activities, MgNPS possess 

potent antibacterial activities. It has been proven that MgO NPs have antibacterial properties against Ralstonia 
solanacearum. MgO NPs might  have strong antibacterial properties against Ralstonia solanacearum-induced tomato 
bacterial wilt, according to recent studies [60]. 
 
6.9. Se and SiNPs (Selenium and Silicon Nanoparticles) 

Both silicon nanoparticles (Si NPs) and selenium nanoparticles (Se NPs) had exhibited strong antibacterial 
action against a wide range microbial disease [61]. Growth and Infections Plant viruses such as the Papaya 
Ringspot Virus (PRV) and the Tomato Yellow Leaf Curl Virus (TYLCV) had been experimentally inhibited by 
silicon oxide (SiO2) nanoparticles (PRSV) [62].  
 
6.10. Pt and Pd NPs (Platinum and Paladium Nanoparticles) 

According to Chlumsky, et al. [63] platinum nanoparticles (Pt NPs) and palladium nanoparticles (Pd NPs) 
could augur potent antibacterial activities against a variety of food-borne pathogen strains as well as bacteria 
including Escherichia coli and Streptococcus mutans. 
 
6.11. Al2O3 NPs (Aluminum oxide Nanoparticles) 

Aluminum oxide (Al2O3) NPs had shown promises in controlling fungal pathogens by stimulating electrostatic 
attraction with cell membranes, increasing ROS production and damaging cellular structures [64]. 
 

6.12. CeO2 NPS (Cerium oxide Nanoparticles) 
Cerium oxide (CeO2) NPs exhibit antibacterial properties and have the potential to regulate phytopathogenic 

activity [65]. 
 
6.13. Ni NPs (Nickel Nanoparticles) 

The antibacterial efficacy of nickel nanoparticles (Ni NPs) had been comparable against a range of diseases, 
including viruses [66]. 
 
6.14. Chitosan Nanoparticles 

Chitosan nanoparticles had shown effectiveness in impeding the spread of viruses within plants and boosting 
the host's immune response. They could strongly enhance fruit resistance and modulate various physiological 
processes in plants, thereby aiding in disease management [67]. 

Overall, nanoparticles offer diverse mechanisms for combating plant pathogens, including induction of systemic 
resistance, inhibition of DNA replication, disruption of cell structure and modulation of cellular signalling 
pathways. Their antibacterial qualities make them useful instruments in the creation of successful plant disease 
management plans. However, the use of cadmium nanoparticles (Cd NPs) is limited due to their toxicity to humans, 
animals and plants.  
 



Agriculture and Food Sciences Research, 2024, 11(2): 203-221 

210 
© 2024 by the authors; licensee Asian Online Journal Publishing Group 

 

 

7. Nanoparticles as “Strategic Weapons” against Plant Pathogens - the Mechanism 
of Action 

Nanotechnology presents various promising avenues for managing plant diseases, primarily through the direct 
application of nanoparticles to foliage, seeds, or soil. Nanotechnology is transforming plant disease detection by 
allowing improved tools to identify pathogens quickly and accurately. Nanoparticles, with their small size and 
distinct features, improve biosensor selectivity, sensitivity and detection limits. When it comes to pathogen 
detection, metal nanoparticles—such as those made of gold, silver, copper, zinc oxide, and other metals—augur 
distinct benefits over enzyme-related testing systems. These advantages include their bigger surface area-to-
volume ratios and simpler physical sensor-mediated detection processes [68]. 
 

8. Cellular Uptake and Mechanism of Nano-Toxicity 
Engineered nanoparticles (ENPs) are absorbed by cells through endocytosis, non-endocytosis, and passive 

transport [69]. Small, positively charged and hydrophobic ENPs are primarily transported via diffusion, whereas 
perisorption can occur via intestinal microvilli or enterocyte cells. Endocytosis routes, including as receptor-
mediated endocytosis and caveolae/lipid raft-dependent endocytosis, transport ENPs to lysosomes, where they 
might induce intracellular toxicity due to metal ions. Transporter proteins or ion channels are used to absorb the 
ions created during ENP breakdown. ENPs can cause toxicity and disturb cytophysiology once they enter inside 
the cell by causing membrane lipid peroxidations [70] and DNA damage plus protein injury [8] and oxidative 
stress via ROS outbursts, followed by other mechanisms that halter the normal physiological states [71]. ENPs' 
form, size, and coating composition are examples of their physicochemical characteristics that affect their toxicity. 
Smaller ENPs may cause more toxicity and particle form also influences nanotoxicity. Positively charged ENPs 
may be more harmful and bioaccumulative due to their affinity for cellular membranes [72]. Dietary exposure to 
ENPs might cause cellular stress, affecting eating behavior and lipid peroxidation levels. A multitude of processes, 
such as direct cellular membrane destruction, disruption of ATP generation, and DNA replication, are the direct 
outcomes of nanomaterial toxicity [73]. When organisms consume free nano-ions, morphological changes occur, 
such as cytoplasm contraction and DNA condensation [74]. Nano-ions also interact with respiratory enzymes and 
transport proteins, resulting in proton leakage and affecting cellular activities [75]. Nanotoxicity causes oxidative 
stress by producing reactive oxygen species (ROS), which damage DNA and cause cell death. The chemical 
composition of nanomaterials impacts the amount of ROS produced. ROS predominantly target DNA, causing 
various forms of oxidative DNA damage [76]. However, the conversion of less reactive species into more reactive 
radicals (Figure 4) sharply worsens cellular damage. Ramos-Zúñiga, et al. [77] study the transition of less reactive 
species into more reactive radicals, particularly the hydroxyl radical, which can cause severe cellular damage 
Ramos-Zúñiga, et al. [77]. 

Figure 4 Illustrates the detailed processes during Nanoparticle toxicity which has a general mechanism. (1) 
Accumulation and dissolution of nanoparticles and entry inside the cell. (2) The concentration of nanoparticles on 
the cell surface causes depolarization and membrane rupture. (3) Nanoparticles’ entry inside the cells causes 
sustained release metallic ions as a result of NP dissolution. The release of ions would produce the following 
effects: (4) ROS ourburst, membrane depolarization via lipid peroxidation and protein oxidation; (5) Reduced ATP 
generation; (6) disruption of endomembrane systems and collapse of photosynthesis by chloroplast assembly (7) 
Mitochondrial membrane depolarization leading to apoptosis. 

 

 
Figure 4. Nanoparticle toxicity has a general mechanism. (1) Accumulation and dissolution of nanoparticles and entry inside the cell. (2) 
The concentration of nanoparticles on the cell surface causes depolarization and membrane rupture. (3) Nanoparticles’ entry inside the 
cells and sustained release metallic ions as a result of NP dissolution. The release of ions would produce the following effects: (4) ROS 
ourburst, membrane depolarization via lipid peroxidation and protein oxidation; (5) Reduced ATP generation; (6) disruption of 
endomembrane systems and collapse of photosynthesis by chloroplast assembly (7) Mitochondrial membrane depolarization leading to 
apoptosis. 



Agriculture and Food Sciences Research, 2024, 11(2): 203-221 

211 
© 2024 by the authors; licensee Asian Online Journal Publishing Group 

 

 

9. Cellular Toxicity via DNA Damage by Nanoparticles 
The DNA damage within the microbial cells exposed to AgNP or ZnONP had been probed by electrophoretic 

analysis DNA strand breakage visualized within agarose gels [78]. Because they produce reactive oxygen species 
(ROS), zinc oxide nanoparticles (ZnO NPs) had been well known for their antibacterial properties. ZnO NPs 
caused concentration-dependent toxicity and membrane damage after being extensively absorbed into the bacterial 
cells. Studies on genotoxicity had shown that exposure to ZnO brought forth substantial DNA damage inside 
bacterial cells. Every observation showed that ZnO NPs caused substantial oxidation of proteins, DNA damage, 
and ROS over-production along with concurrent thiol group depletion. Moreover, ZnO NP exposure was found to 
downregulate a number of genes linked to the metabolic pathway and DNA repair, while simultaneously 
upregulating the expression of genes connected to the DNA damage responses [79]. CuI NPs generated ROS-
mediated DNA damage for transcription suppression, as demonstrated by reporter gene assay, and they also caused 
ROS production in both gram positive and gram negative bacteria. In the presence of amine functional groups from 
diverse biological molecules, ROS most likely would have developed on the surface of CuI nanoparticles. 
Additionally, they cause harm to membranes [80]. According to Gordon, et al. [81] Ag ions would prevent DNA 
replication and deactivate SH-groups in functional proteins. Microorganisms' biological activities, including 
alterations in the structure and function of cell membranes, were known to be impacted by silver. Silver also would 
likely cause the inhibition of the expression of proteins involved in ATP generation [82]. It follows that oxidative 
stress, which is brought on by nanoparticles (NPs) might harm DNA in microorganisms by resulting in oxidized 
DNA bases, single-strand breaks (SSBs), and double-strand breaks (DSBs). Additionally, NPs can affect DNA 
repair processes through their effects on gene expression, deregulate DNA repair protein functioning, and the 
deplete nucleotide pool required for DNA repair systems. 
 

10. Nanomaterials and Regulation of Oxidative Stress 
Since the natural pool of endogenous antioxidants, which may detoxify free radicals in a normal condition, is 

outweighed by the creation of ROS, oxidative stress is a phenomenon that occurs when a cell's redox equilibrium is 
upset [13]. Reactive oxygen species (ROS), which are highly reactive free ions or radicals created from molecular 
oxygen during redox reactions, are able to exist independently and have one or more unpaired electrons in their 
outer orbit or valency shell. A free radical's odd number of electrons makes it incredibly reactive, short-lived, and 
unstable. They can steal electrons from other molecules to become stable since they are extremely reactive. The 
attacked molecule becomes a free radical after losing an electron, which sets off a chain of events that ultimately 
damage the living cell. The most prevalent ROS in plant biological systems are singlet oxygen (1O2), superoxide 
radical (O2-), hydrogen peroxide (H2O2), and hydroxy radical (OH•). (Figure 5). These substances' high reactivity 
and toxicity make them capable of causing oxidative cell death [83, 84]. The electron transport chain (ETC) in 
mitochondria, the Mechler reaction in chloroplasts, and photorespiration (C2 cycle) in peroxisomes are the three 
subcellular compartments that produce multiple reactive intermediaries promulgating ROS outburst [14, 85]. 
Environmental stress and increased ROS accumulation are directly connected. When an organism produces too 
many reactive oxygen species (ROS), it damages its physiological capabilities and ultimately leads to cell death. 
External stimuli such as heat stress, ionizing and non-ionizing radiation, heavy metals, xenobiotic chemicals, UV 
radiation, and different phytopathogens can upset cellular homeostasis, which in turn can trigger the generation of 
reactive oxygen species (ROS) in plant cells [12]. 
 

 
Figure 5. Schematical representation of ROS generation and their interconversions. 

 



Agriculture and Food Sciences Research, 2024, 11(2): 203-221 

212 
© 2024 by the authors; licensee Asian Online Journal Publishing Group 

 

 

11. Production and Inter Switching of Reactive Oxygen Species in Microbial Cells 
ROSs have an impact on living cells and tissues that including plants [12, 86] which are both positive and 

negative [86, 87]. ROS must be produced at a low to moderate level in the cellular compartments of aerobic 
organisms [13]. On contrary, elevated levels ROS out of abiotic and biotic stress can generate two distinct groups 
of reactions out of production of Reactive oxygen species (ROS: *OH- , 1O2 , O.- 

2) and reactive nitrogen species, 
(RNS: *NO, *NO2, ONOO-, N2O3,HNO2, NO-, NO+, N2O4) (Figure 6) which can lead to: lipid peroxidation and 
protein carbonylation. Lipid peroxidation is a process that turns unsaturated lipids into saturated residues, such as 
hydroperoxide [70, 88]. When proteins are carbonylated, ROS can oxidize to the unsaturated nucleus of amino 
acids, including tyrosine, histidine, tryptophan, phenylalanine, etc.A downstream reaction produces a peroxide 
product in both cases, which can also progressively break down bimolecular fabrication of living cells. The surplus 
reactive oxygen species (ROS) generated within the cellular microcosm is scavenged by plants' efficient antioxidant 
defense mechanism under a variety of oxidative stress circumstances.The antioxidant safety net is composed of 
both enzymatic and non-enzymatic elements [89]. Flavonoids, tocopherol, carotenoid, polyamine, alkaloids, and 
phenolic compounds are examples of non-enzymatic components; glutathione reductase (GR), ascorbate peroxidase 
(APX), glutathione dismutase (SOD), and catalase (CAT) are examples of enzymatic components. Pizzino, et al. 
[87] and Rudenko, et al. [90] (Figure 6). This whole paragraph is rewritten as per instructions. 

 

 
Figure 6. An imbalance between ROS and antioxidants brought on by abiotic stress causes an 
oxidative imbalance in live cells' cellular homeostasis.  

 
The generation of reactive oxygen species (ROS), such as hydroxy radical (•OH), is a key initiator of lipid 

peroxidation, which degrades lipoprotein and produces a cascade of end products including conjugated dienes and 
malondialdehyde (MDA) [70, 86, 88, 91]. 
 

12. Mechanisms of NP Uptake by Higher Plants 
12.1. Passive Uptake of NPs 

Understanding how nanoparticles (NPs) are absorbed by plants is critical for determining their interactions 
with plant cells and immunological responses. There have been several hypothesized methods for NP 
internalization, including passive uptake processes. Depending on their size, surface charge, and hydrophobicity, 
NPs can enter plants passively through diffusion and adsorption [92]. When NPs come into contact with a plant's 
surface, they can disperse through the stomata or cuticle and gather in different plant tissues. Their hydrophobicity 
facilitates passage through the lipophilic cuticle, while stomatal holes serve as entry locations. For example, gold 
nanoparticles coated with polyvinylpyrrolidone and citrate are passively absorbed by wheat leaves through cuticles 
[93]. However, additional research is required to understand how foliar NPs are translocated. 
 
12.2. Active Uptake of NPs 

Plants may absorb nanoparticles (NPs) selectively through active uptake mechanisms, which allows for precise 
targeting and regulated responses. Endocytosis, in which NPs are engulfed by the cell membrane to form vesicles, 
allows plant cells to actively absorb NPs. Plants can control NP absorption and respond to environmental cues 
thanks to this widely used mechanism. Plant cells take up NPs more readily when they enter endocytosis pathways 
mediated by caveolin or clathrin. For example, tobacco protoplasts actively internalize gold nanoparticles via 
clathrin-dependent pathways [69]. For plant cells to absorb nanoparticles by endocytosis, their surface properties 
are essential. For instance, triethylene glycol-functionalized silica NPs were consumed by tobacco mesophyll 
protoplasts, while bare, unfunctionalized silica NPs were not able to penetrate plant cells [94]. Even with these 
results, there is still a paucity of direct evidence of endocytic NP uptake by plant cells, which calls for additional 
study to comprehend integrated mechanisms of NP uptake and translocation within the plant system. 
 
 
 



Agriculture and Food Sciences Research, 2024, 11(2): 203-221 

213 
© 2024 by the authors; licensee Asian Online Journal Publishing Group 

 

 

12.3. Uptake and Translocation of NPs through Roots 
Plants are mostly exposed to soil-applied nanoparticles (NPs) through their roots, where they interact with 

root hairs and epidermal cells. Plant roots are more likely to attract and retain positively charged nanoparticles 
(NPs) or those that chemically interact with the root cell walls. With the help of transpiration rates, NPs can move 
from inside the root to other plant portions through the xylem and phloem [95]. For example, it has been found 
that copper nanoparticles migrate with water in the xylem, making it easier for them to go from the roots to the 
aerial parts of maize. The variety of NP absorption mechanisms enhances the potential of these compounds as plant 
immune modulators by enabling targeted administration and controlled release of bioactive compounds. However, 
in order to choose application techniques and guarantee effectiveness in agriculture, characteristics such as the 
physicochemical properties of NPs, their intended use, targeted crops, and desired interaction with the plant 
system are essential [96]. Research into NP absorption pathways is progressing, and this could lead to the full 
realization of their potential in sustainable plant disease management. In addition to controlling oxidative stress 
and maintaining redox homeostasis, nanomaterials can also occasionally cause oxidative stress [97]. Owing to 
these two features, it is critical to comprehend the precise metabolic processes of NMs and their interactions with 
plants. Lipid peroxidation and electrolytic leakage were decreased as a result of antioxidants' production squelching 
the ROS level. Researchers such as Rizwan, et al. [98] discovered that foliar application of Si and TiO2-NPs 
alleviated oxidative stress in rice plants under cadmium (Cd) stress by reducing lipid peroxidation and electrolytic 
leakage by enhancing the activities of antioxidant enzymes like SOD, CAT, and APX.Given that nanoscience is 
now being investigated as a discipline connected to redox biology and biochemistry, it is critical to comprehend the 
exact method by which nanoparticles (NPs) avoid ROS overproduction mitigating overall normal physiological 
processes. 
 

13. How Nanomaterials (NMs) would emerge as ‘Nano-Weapons’ against 
Phytopathogens? 
• The special optical characteristics of nanomaterials (NMs) enable the very accurate and practical detection of 

plant pathogens [16, 54, 99]. 

• NMs damage to the membrane transporter and nutrient absorption systems of pathogen, [100]. 

• Nanoparticles generate ROS inside the pathogenic cell and developed nanotoxicity which results damage of 
nucleic acids (DNA/RNA), uncontrolled cell signalling, cytotoxicity, genotoxicity and PCD [101]. 

• Toxic ions generated as a result of nanotoxicity impair membrane protein activity and cell permeability 
[102]. 

• Nanoparticles are designed to offer distinct and improved antibiotic activity against plant diseases, depending 
on their size and dose [46]. 

• NPs as bioactive chemical delivery agents: Many bioactive substances, including essential nutrients, plant 
hormones, RNA interference agents, and chemical protectants, may be transported via nanoparticles (NPs). 
This feature highlights how they could completely transform plant genetic engineering, growth regulation, 
and nutrition management [103, 104]. 

• Nanoparticles can improve nutrient delivery to plants by increasing solubility, stability and bioavailability. 
Nanofertilizers developed for this purpose preserve nutrients from degradation and could release them in a 
guarded manner, allowing for optimal welcome by the plant tissues. This technique has the potential to 
reduce nutrient deficits and increase agricultural productivity, hence addressing global food security issues. 
Zinc-based nanofertilizers, for example, stimulate seed germination and growth in a variety of crops, whereas 
copper oxide nanoparticles efficiently transfer copper to increase crop yields and control plant diseases such 
as wilt by Fusarium sp and bacterial Fruit Blotch Disease (FBD) [105]. Despite promising findings in 
greenhouse conditions, field experiments are required to evaluate their potential in real-world environments. 

• Delivery of plant hormones: Plant hormones can be precisely delivered to specific areas of a plant using 
nanoparticles (NPs), which enables the plant to respond to disease or infection [106]. Mesoporous silica NPs, 
for example, had been created to supply abscisic acid (ABA) to Arabidopsis, whilst biogenic iron NPs had been 
utilized to therapeutically deliver salicylic acid (SA) into watermelon plants, for increasing resistance to wilt 
disease caused by Fusariumsp [107]. These nano-enabled delivery systems ensure that plants receive 
hormone signals at the optimal time, improving stress tolerance and utilization of the chief nutrients. Growth 
hormones, which stimulate root development, shoot growth, and flowering in commercially important plants, 
can also be distributed using chitosan-based nanocomposites [41]. Using NPs to deliver hormones offers the 
chance to control plant development and stress reactions, improving crop resilience and performance. 

• Small interfering (Si-RNA) RNAs delivery through NPs: Plant cells can be directly exposed to small-
interfering RNAs (siRNAs), which overwhelmingly mediate RNA interference (RNAi) responses and confer 
resistance against pests and diseases, through the use of nanoparticles (NPs), an adaptable auto-regulatory 
delivery system [108]. Researchers can regulate the expression of certain genes associated with disease 
susceptibility, insect resistance, or other agronomically important traits by using this capability, which 
enables targeted gene silencing. NPs increase the effectiveness of gene silencing by protecting siRNAs from 
degradation in the harsh extracellular environment and promoting cellular absorption [109]. Compared with 
naked dsRNA, pathogen-specific double-stranded (ds)RNA administered by layered double hydroxide 
nanosheets, for instance, remained stable for as long as 30 days and offered tobacco plants sustained 
protection against viral infections. This method has the potential to reduce the need for medicinal 
interventions by conferring resistance to diseases and pests. One useful method for precision farming and 
developing long-term crop protection strategies is the use of NPs as siRNA carriers [103]. 

• Chemical cyto-protectants delivery by NPs: The innovative application of nanoparticles (NPs) in crop 
delivery for chemical protectants represents a significant advancement in precision farming and disease 
control. It has been challenging to apply chemical protectants like fungicides and bactericides effectively and 
efficiently, despite the fact they are essential for shielding crops from phytopathogens. It is possible to 



Agriculture and Food Sciences Research, 2024, 11(2): 203-221 

214 
© 2024 by the authors; licensee Asian Online Journal Publishing Group 

 

 

provide these protectants precisely and regulated to particular plant tissues and pathogens by encasing or 
binding them in NPs [110]. For example, prochloraz had been transported via mesoporous silica 
nanoparticles, providing further defense against Rice Blast Disease (RBD) [111]. Similarly, silica 
nanoparticles loaded with azoxystrobin shown enhanced fungicidal activity against Tomato Late Blight 
Disease (TLBD) [112]. When compared to bulk counterparts, nanoscale fungicides were more effective 
against germs and prevented disastrous crop illnesses. 

• Weeds and Arthropod Pests Management by NPs: several reports established that pests  can move across 
cultivated and noncultivated plants, including weeds, posing issues for disease management. Insects play an 
important role in infection transmission, which complicates the situation. Traditional chemical control 
methods pose environmental problems, emphasizing the necessity for novel approaches such as 
nanotechnology. Nanoformulations show potential in improving pesticide efficiency while decreasing the 
environmental impact. For example, nanoencapsulation of atrazine boosted herbicidal efficacy tenfold, while 
light-triggered nanoformulations improved herbicidal effects while reducing toxicity to nontarget plants, 
such as Glycine max [113]. However, optimizing target delivery remains a difficulty, particularly given the 
similarities between weeds and crops. Carbon-based nanomaterials have been investigated for more effective 
and targeted pesticide delivery. Moreover, nanoparticles had shown useful roles in the management of insect 
pests. For example, encapsulated thiamethoxam has been effective in reducing Asian citrus psyllids [114]. 
Eco-friendly pest management solutions are offered by combining bioinsecticides with materials based on 
nanotechnology. Moreover, nanoparticles can be engineered to react to outside stimuli, which enhances their 
properties. For example, as temperature changed, mesoporous silica nanoparticles boosted insecticidal action 
against aphids. RNA interference technology paired with nanoclay effectively prevented virus transmission 
via insect vectors [115]. Overall, nanotechnology shows potential for transforming agricultural disease and 
pest management systems. 

 

14. Environmental Risk Assessment of NPs 
The rising use of man-made nanoparticles in the environment highlights the need for rigorous risk assessment 

and regulatory controls. Commercializing nanomaterials for agricultural applications involves a number of 
obstacles, including production scale, cost reduction and safety. To have a better understanding of the production, 
toxicity, and field application of nanomaterials in agriculture, more research is required. By producing 
nanopesticides, nanotechnology has the ability to completely transform agricultural pest management. These 
nanopesticides have various advantages, including enhanced solubility, reduced toxicity, targeted delivery and pH-
dependent release. Nanopesticides are still in the early phases of development, and more study is needed to 
determine their effectiveness and potential toxicity to soil and the environment, despite their potential advantages. 
Although the use of nanoparticles (NPs) is expanding across many industries, there is a risk of environmental 
pollution from their release. They have the capacity to permanently contaminate the water, soil, and air [71]. 
Among the most popular sources are wastewater treatment facilities, electronics, paints, pigments, coatings, and 
cosmetics. Although nanoparticles can be used to clean up the environment, their extensive their extensive use might 

effectually jeopardize the ecosystems upon randomization. NP dispersion is aided by both nanosensors and 
nanofertilizers. In general, nanoparticles are challenging to control and contain due to their small size and 
reactivity. Moreover, NPs can be designed to release their payload in response to specific environmental conditions 
or triggers, which reduces the amount of fungicide needed overall and the amount of off-target effects. Chemical 
protectant delivery by nanoparticles (NPs) may change agriculture's approach to disease control; however there are 
safety issues and unintended consequences for other living things and the environment to take into account. All 
things considered, nanoparticles have shown promise as flexible means of delivering bioactive substances to plants, 
offering a novel approach to challenges in agriculture. The potential uses of NP-mediated smart delivery systems 
are expanding as nanotechnology research advances, providing new opportunities to increase agricultural output, 
nutritional value, and sustainability.However, concerns including NP biocompatibility, environmental impact 
assessment, and regulatory factors need to be carefully explored as this technology moves closer to being used in 
agriculture. 
 

15. Bacteria and Fungi Play Crucial Roles in Promoting Plant Growth through 
Various Mechanisms in Natural Environment 
• Nutrient Cycling: Organic debris in the soil is broken down by fungi and bacteria, releasing nutrients that 

plants can absorb. This cycle of nutrients increases soil fertility and provides essential nutrients for plant 
development. 

• Nitrogen Fixation: Certain bacteria build symbiotic relationships with leguminous plants, such Rhizobium 
species, and transform atmospheric nitrogen into a form that plants can utilize. Nitrogen is added to the soil 
through this process, which is necessary for plant growth.  

• Mycorrhizal Associations: Mycorrhizal fungi create mutualistic relationships with plant roots, extending 
their reach and increasing nutrient intake, particularly phosphate and micronutrients. This symbiotic 
interaction can greatly enhance plant growth and health. 

• Disease Suppression: By building systemic resistance in plants, manufacturing antibiotics, or engaging in 
resource competition, beneficial bacteria and fungi in the soil can inhibit the growth of dangerous diseases. 
This aids in preventing disease in plants.  

• Stress Tolerance: Certain bacteria and fungi create chemicals that help plants withstand environmental 
challenges like drought, salt and heavy metal contamination. These bacteria improve plant health and 
resilience by increasing their stress tolerance. 

• Biofertilizers and Biostimulants: In agriculture, several bacteria and fungus serve as biofertilizers and 
biostimulants. They can boost soil fertility, nitrogen uptake, root growth and plant vigor, resulting in higher 
crop yields.  



Agriculture and Food Sciences Research, 2024, 11(2): 203-221 

215 
© 2024 by the authors; licensee Asian Online Journal Publishing Group 

 

 

• Overall, bacteria and fungi have various and crucial roles in encouraging plant development and health, thus 
they are beneficial. 

 

16. Bacterial Nano-Toxicity by ENPs  
Bacteria, which are essential for environmental processes such as fermentation and decomposition, are 

extensively researched in eco-nano-toxicity because of their customization for ecological sustainability. Bacillus, 
Pseudomonas, Escherichiasp and majority of nitrifying bacteria are typically employed in this research. Some 
engineered nanoparticles (ENPs) with antibacterial capabilities are included into consumer products and eventually 
released into the environment. Interaction with bacteria has an impact on their growth and ecosystem function. 
ENPs such as Ag, CuO and carbon-based ones reduce bacterial growth and change enzyme activity, mostly by 
membrane degradation and oxidative stress generation [116]. Studies have shown that ENPs have a wide range of 
favourable vis-à-vis toxicological effects upon several beneficial microbiota [117]. 
 

17. Protozoal Nano-Toxicity out of ENPs Accumulation 
Protozoa are single-celled eukaryotic organisms that feed bacteria, thrive in damp environments, and are 

crucial to the development and maintenance of microbial communities. They are actively researched in eco-
nanotoxicity assessments. Tetrahymena thermophila is an excellent model for assessing the toxicity of engineered 
nanoparticles (ENPs). ENPs mostly enter protozoa by endocytosis and phagocytosis, generating toxicity by 
upregulating metallothionein genes, modifying membrane fluidity, causing oxidative stress and lowering viability 
and motility [118]. Protozoa also serve as indicators of ENP trophic level transmission in food chains, since 
studies have shown that cadmium is biomagnified from ENP-loaded bacteria to protozoa and beyond. In vivo bio-
imaging shows ENPs' trophic transmission across various layers of the food chain. 

 

18. Nano-Toxicity of Fungi out of ENPs Accumulation 
In a variety of environments, fungi are essential decomposers and are crucial to the nitrogen cycle. 

Understanding the harmful effects of engineered nanoparticles (ENPs) on fungi is critical to ecosystem health. 
ENP exposure can harm cell membranes, impede development, lower cell density, cause cytoplasm blebbing and 
impair breakdown activity by influencing lignocellulolytic enzyme synthesis [119]. High doses of ENPs utilized in 
toxicity studies may not accurately reflect environmental exposure levels. In natural settings, fungal communities 
have been constantly exposed to lower concentrations of ENPs over longer periods of time, emphasizing the need 
for more representative nano-toxicity studies. 
 

19. Harmful Effects of Nanoparticles (NPs) on Earthworms 
Although snails and earthworms are beneficial and crucial parts of healthy soil ecosystems, their populations 

and activities need to be carefully controlled to reduce any potential harm to plant development and agricultural 
output. Earthworms, which belong to the phylum "Annelida," are invertebrate animals that live in soil and 
contribute significantly to soil quality by increasing plant nutrients. The species of earthworms found in the field 
affect the soil's nutritional value. Based on the range of soil types and horizons they inhabit, earthworms are 
divided into three ecological groups: endogenic species, like Aporrectodea caliginosa, which live in organic horizons 
and dig horizontal burrows; epigeic species, like Eisenia fetida, which live on the surface and in litter; and anecic 
species, like Lumbricus terrestris, which live in deep, vertical burrows and consume large amounts of soil. Numerous 
organic acids and enzymes secreted by earthworms interact with soil to promote the growth of bacteria, fungi, 

actinomycetes, and soil microflora. These microorganisms help fix nitrogen, solubilize nutrients, and increase plant 
growth and production potential. Earthworms are therefore essential to a sustainable ecosystem and are commonly 
known as "farmers' friends." According to research, earthworms' physiological processes and general 
environmental activities are negatively impacted by nanoparticles (NPs). Numerous scientific studies have found 
detrimental impacts on the digestive and immune systems, species diversity, and the growth, reproduction, and 
development of earthworms. Pheretima posthuma, the most prevalent species of earthworm, is frequently employed 
as a standard test organism to identify environmental pollution levels [71, 120]. 
 

20. Biochemical Pathways Leading to Toxicity of Soil Microflora and Macrofauna: 
Oxidative Stress and Cellular Death Occurrence after ENPs Exposure 

When faced with environmental challenges, reactive oxygen species (ROS), which are produced during regular 
metabolic processes, function as signaling molecules. In rhizospheric microflora and fauna, engineered 
nanoparticles (ENPs) can lead to an excess of reactive oxygen species (ROS), which can induce oxidative stress, 
cellular damage, DNA fragmentation, dysfunction of proteins and enzymes, and finally cell death. To reduce ROS 
effects, organisms have antioxidant defense mechanisms that include both non-enzymatic (e.g., ascorbate, proline 
and phenolics) and enzymatic (e.g., catalase, peroxidase and superoxide dismutase) counterparts. However, high 
ENP concentrations can overwhelm these defenses, resulting in oxidative damage to cellular organelles. The 
efficiency of antioxidant responses to ENP-induced oxidative stress varies depending on the rhizospheric species 
and exposure conditions. Non-enzymatic antioxidants including ascorbate, proline and phenolics play important 
roles in scavenging ROS and protecting animals from oxidative damage. To fully comprehend the mechanisms of 
nanotoxicity in beneficial microflora and fauna, as well as the reactions of antioxidant defense systems to acute and 
long-term exposure to ambient deposition of manufactured nanoparticles, more research is required. 

If a virus infects soil it may have a number of regulatory impacts on plant development and health: 

• Nutrient Uptake: Nanoparticles influence nutrient availability in the soil. If plants are infected with a virus, 
the nutrition cycle may be disrupted, resulting in deficits in key nutrients required for plant growth.  

• Toxicity: Certain nanoparticles (Cd, Pb, Cr and Hg based) can be hazardous to plants. If a virus affects the 
composition or activity of nanoparticles in the soil, the toxicity levels may rise, affecting plant growth.  



Agriculture and Food Sciences Research, 2024, 11(2): 203-221 

216 
© 2024 by the authors; licensee Asian Online Journal Publishing Group 

 

 

• Microbial Interactions: The microbial ecology in the soil, which is essential for the cycling of nutrients and 
plant health, can be impacted by nanoparticles. Unbalances in the soil ecosystem could result from a virus 
that affects nanoparticles and interferes with these microbial interactions. 

• Plant Immunity: Nanoparticles have been investigated for their ability to boost plant immunity to diseases. If 
virus-infected nanoparticles disrupt this function, plants may become more susceptible to disease. 

• Soil Structure: Nanoparticles can alter soil structure and water retention. A virus-induced change in 
nanoparticle activity may modify soil characteristics, influencing plant water availability and root growth. 

• Overall, the impact would be determined by the individual virus, the nanoparticles used and their interactions 
with the soil microflora and plant population ecology Khan, et al. [50]. 

 

21. Sensing and Detection and Plant Pathogens in Agricultural Crops through 
Nanomaterials (NMs) 

Plant resources are what sustain human civilization. There are three essential needs: shelter, food and fiber. 
These requirements are increasing every day in line with the global population growth. The yield of crops is 
greatly hampered by the shrinking agricultural lands brought about by the fast urbanization and industrialization 
of society. Another barrier that results in biotic stress in agricultural crops is plant diseases, which causes the 
plants to become partially impaired and eventually die. It presents a significant hazard to food production and 
security. Plant infections have wreaked havoc on some major disasters. For instance, Phytophthora infestans in 
Ireland produced the Irish Potato Famine in the 1840s, while Helminthosporium oryzae in rice caused the Great 
Bengal Famine in 1943. The majority of research on plant biological stress attempts to reduce appalling yield loss, 
either straight or circuitously [15]. The administration of previously discussed insecticides, fungicides, pesticides 
and fertilizers is the primary method used to manage biotic stress in agricultural crops. Engineered sensors (Figure 
7) based on nanomaterials are used to track stress caused by pathogens as well as the environment. Researchers 
discovered that nanosensors worked well to identify fungal pathogens that cause plant illnesses that are soil-borne, 
air-borne, seed-borne and other. An electrochemical sensor that can identify the causative agent of bacterial specks 
of Solanum lycopersicum (Psedumonassyringae DC3000) with a recognition limit scale-up of 214 pM [121]. In order to 
identify soil-borne pathogens such as Ralstoniasolanacearum, which causes bacterial wilt in potato disease, the 
researchers used Au-NPs [122]. Therefore, remote sensing technology based on nanosensors is a great way to 
identify, anticipate and control insects, pests and plant diseases in order to safeguard both commercial and 
agricultural crops and preserve the environment. 
 

22. Nanotechnology Mediated Detection of Plant Pathogens at Early Stages of 
Infections 

Researchers found that fungal pathogens that cause soil-borne, air-borne, seed-borne and other plant ailments 
may be effectively identified using nanosensors. With a recognition limit of 214 pM, an electrochemical sensor can 
determine the cause of bacterial specks of Solanum lycopersicum(Psedumonassyringae DC3000) [121]. The 
researchers employed Au-NPs to identify soil-borne pathogens, such as Ralstonia solanacearum, which causes 
bacterial wilt disease in potato [122]. In order to protect both commercial and agricultural crops and maintain the 
environment, remote sensing technology based on nanosensors is an excellent approach to identify, anticipate and 
control insects, pests and plant diseases. 

 

 
Figure 7. Flowchart shows the advent of different nanotechnology tools used for pathogen diagnosis. 

 

23. Challenges and Limitations of Nanosensors 
Nanotechnology holds great promise for revolutionizing pest management in agriculture through the 

development of nanopesticides. Numerous benefits are provided by these nanopesticides, including increased 



Agriculture and Food Sciences Research, 2024, 11(2): 203-221 

217 
© 2024 by the authors; licensee Asian Online Journal Publishing Group 

 

 

solubility, increased effectiveness with decreased toxicity, targeted administration, and pH-dependent 
release.Nevertheless, study is extremely demanded to determine the efficacy and potential toxicity of 
nanopesticides to soil and the environment because they are still in the early phases of development, despite their 
apparent advantages. The precise definition of nanopesticides by regulatory bodies is still pending, and nothing is 
known about how they affect pesticide resistance. Challenges include the lack of regulatory standards, high 
manufacturing costs and public perception. Bridging the knowledge gap among farmers and stakeholders, as well 
as developing scalable solutions compatible with existing farming practices, is essential for successful 
implementation. To overcome these obstacles and fully utilize nanotechnology in agriculture, teamwork between 
companies and researchers is essential. For risk evaluation and regulatory approval, dependable data collection and 
long-term field experiments are required. Additionally, stakeholders should be informed about storage conditions 
and cytotoxicity concerns associated with certain nanoparticles and efforts should be made to utilize green and 
natural materials for nanoparticle synthesis to minimize environmental risks. Overall, interdisciplinary 
collaboration and comprehensive research are akin to advancing agricultural nanotechnology responsibly. 
Nanotechnology has potential for sustainable and environmentally friendly agriculture practices by introducing 
new methods of administering fertilizers, insecticides and other materials. However, current study indicates that 
nanoparticles could affect soil animals such as earthworms, increasing safety issues in food and agriculture. The 
environment's growing employment of artificial nanoparticles highlights the significance of stringent risk 
assessment and regulatory limitations. Several obstacles must be overcome in order to commercialize 
nanomaterials for use in agriculture, including those related to manufacturing scale, cost control, and safety. To 
fully comprehend the production, toxicity, and practical use of nanomaterials in agriculture, more study is required. 

Nanomaterials (NMs) have special qualities that could make them useful in agriculture. These promising 
qualities include: I) increased bioavailability of the active ingredient; II) improved pesticide, fungicide, and 
insecticide solubility; III) releasing the active ingredient based on pH level; IV) transferring RNAi molecules for 
disease management; V) ROS detoxification and oxidative stress regulation in plants; and VI) epigenetic and 
epigenomic studies of animal stress regulation [123]etc. 

Although nanomaterials (NMs) offer many potential uses and benefits in agriculture, particularly in terms of 
helping crops become more resilient to stress, they also have a number of harmful consequences on our ecosystem 
and living things [124]. Nanoparticles mediated pollution is danger to the natural flora and fauna including 
beneficial bacteria, fungi and soil-nematodes (Soil microflora)by causing long term nanotoxicity in their body, 
decreasing soil fertility, low level of nutrient solubilization and losing the activities of PGPR in soil [125].  

Nano-agrochemicals continue to be denied authorization to be commercialized in the market due to their 
vulnerability towards unfavorable environmental attainments. When it comes to using fungicides, pesticides, 
herbicides, or other products based on nanoparticles (NPs), regulatory bodies or the pharmaceutical industry have 
failed to give the right ratio of nano substances and their maximum level of effective dose without endangering the 
environment. Furthermore, studies and researches are urgent for eco-friendly use of nanoparticles (NPs) in 
agriculture and its commercialization. Additionally, scientists ought to create fresh, workable solutions that our 
farmers can readily use without interfering with their current methods and practices [126]. In particular, more 
research using an in-vitro method is still needed to determine the appropriate dose level, establish regulatory 
requirements, and modify and use crops at the field level when using NMs to agriculture [127]. 
 

24. Conclusion and Future Perspectives for Future Smart Agriculture 
Nanotechnology is a vast field of study that combines aspects of environmental biology, ecotoxicology, physics, 

chemistry, botany, biotechnology, and agricultural science. With atomic sizes ranging from 0.1 to 100 nm, 
nanomaterials (NMs) can have both positive and negative environmental effects. In order to apply NMs to their 
biological roots, researchers should concentrate on using them by highlighting and improving their ecologically 
favorable properties in the proper amounts. Nanomaterials are widely used in agriculture to boost high 
productivity and sustainability. NMs are mostly used as nanopesticides, nanofertilizers, nanoinsecticides, 
nanofungicides, and nanoherbicides to protect agricultural crops from pests and boost their fertility. This paper 
discusses these applications. Our study also demonstrates how NMs help cells defend against redox homeostasis 
imbalances, which cause ROS to be produced in excess and activate the antioxidant defense system. Additionally, 
NMs would be improved as a tool for producing heat shock proteins [13] balancing physiological homeostasis, and 
enhancing epigenetic memory [123] in plants to fight off biotic and abiotic stressors. The type of NMs, the dosage 
required for each type of abiotic stress (drought, cold, salinity, etc.), and their effects on over ten different plant 
species were all documented. To enhance comprehension, scientific examples are provided on the use of NMs in 
sustainable agriculture, the production of ROS and their interconversion, and antioxidant defense 
mechanisms.Despite a number of innovative research initiatives, there are still several gaps in the field of 
nanoscience. How precisely nanomaterials (NMs) regulated and activated the antioxidant system against reactive 
oxygen species (ROS) is still unclear and contradictory, for example. Thus, before moving into the new and more 
sophisticated stage of NM-based agriculture, it is essential to have a precise understanding of how plants and NMs 
interact under different stressful conditions and how this affects long-term exposure. An organization that 
conducts research on nanotechnology should create suitable rules for the safe handling of nanoparticles (NMs), 
their variety of uses in biological systems, and their appropriate disposal to avoid harm to the environment or 

public health. Furthermore, NMs are used as sensitive and efficient pathogen diagnostic tools in the form of 
miRNA-based diagnosis, nano-biosensors, nano-barcoding, and quantum dots, among others. The writers of the 
review paper anticipate that it will meet the fundamental needs of upcoming students and researchers in 
nanoscience who want to concentrate on the function and use of NMs in agriculture. As nanotechnology research 
progresses, the potential applications of nanoparticle-mediated smart delivery systems are growing, opening up 
new avenues to enhance sustainability, nutritional value, and agricultural output. However, issues including NP 
biocompatibility, environmental impact, and regulatory considerations must be appropriately addressed as this 
strategy becomes more and more viable in agriculture. Through the introduction of innovative techniques for 
applying fertilizers, insecticides, and other items, nanotechnology has the potential to support ecologically friendly 



Agriculture and Food Sciences Research, 2024, 11(2): 203-221 

218 
© 2024 by the authors; licensee Asian Online Journal Publishing Group 

 

 

and sustainable agricultural practices. However, recent studies indicate that if nanoparticles are not applied 

carefully, they may partially damage beneficial microorganisms in the rhizosphere, including earthworms. This 
may possibly augment raising safety concerns in food and agriculture. Regulatory bodies have yet to adequately 
define nanopesticides and there is a dearth of understanding about their consequences on pesticide resistance. 
Challenges include a lack of regulatory standards, expensive manufacturing costs and public opinion. Bridging the 
knowledge gap between farmers and stakeholders, as well as designing scalable solutions that are compatible with 
current farming techniques is critical for effective adoption of Nano-based strategies for future smart agriculture. 
To overcome these obstacles and realize the full potential of nanotechnology in agriculture, industry and 
researchers must work hand-in-hand. Risk assessment and regulatory approval depend on long-term field 
experiments with reliable data. In addition, stakeholders should be informed about the storage conditions and 
cytotoxicity problems connected with specific nanoparticles and efforts should be made to use green and natural 
materials for nanoparticle production to reduce environmental dangers. Overall, interdisciplinary collaboration and 
comprehensive research are crucial to developing agricultural nanotechnology ethically. 
 
List of Abbreviation:  
NMs: Nanomaterials; NPs: Nanoparticles; PGRs: Plant growth regulators; ROS: Reactive oxygen species; CuO: 
Copper oxide; ZnO: Zinc oxide; MgO: Magnesium oxide; MgOH: Magnesium hydroxide; Al2O3: Aluminum oxide; 
TiO2: Titanium dioxide; Au: Gold; CuONPs: copper oxide-based nanomaterials, ZnONPs : zinc oxide-based 
nanopesticide, MgOHNPs: magnesium hydroxide-based nanopesticide, MgONPs : magnesium oxide-based 
nanopesticides, 1O2: Singlet oxygen; O2-: Superoxide; H2O2: Hydrogen peroxide; OH∙: Hydroxy radical; BYMV: 
Bean Yellow Mosaic Virus., PCD: Programmed Cell Death., PGPR: plant growth-promoting rhizobacteria. ETC: 
Electron Transport Chain; SOD: Superoxide dismutase; CAT: Catalase; APX: Ascorbate peroxidase; GPX: 
Glutathione peroxidase; GR: Glutathione reductase; MDA: Malondialdehyde; Fe2O3: Ferric oxide; Ag: Silver; Si: 
Silicon; Ni: Nickel; CeO2: Cerium oxide; Cd: Cadmium; ELISA: Enzyme linked immuno sorbent assay; PCR: 
Polymerasechain reaction; miRNA: micro RNA; SiRNA: Small interfereing RNA, HSPs: Heat Shock Proteins. 
 

References 
[1] K. Neme, A. Nafady, S. Uddin, and Y. B. Tola, "Application of nanotechnology in agriculture, postharvest loss reduction and food 

processing: Food security implication and challenges," Heliyon, vol. 7, no. 12, p. e08539, 2021.  
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2021.e08539 

[2] L. Zhao et al., "Nano-biotechnology in agriculture: Use of nanomaterials to promote plant growth and stress tolerance," Journal of 
Agricultural and Food Chemistry, vol. 68, no. 7, pp. 1935-1947, 2020.  https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jafc.9b06615 

[3] J. Yang, W. Cao, and Y. Rui, "Interactions between nanoparticles and plants: Phytotoxicity and defense mechanisms," Journal of 
Plant Interactions, vol. 12, no. 1, pp. 158-169, 2017.  https://doi.org/10.1080/17429145.2017.1310944 

[4] G. M. Gonzalez, F. Cellini, V. Fotopoulos, R. Balestrini, and V. Arbona, "New approaches to improve crop tolerance to biotic and 
abiotic stresses," Physiologia Plantarum, vol. 174, no. 1, p. e13547, 2022.  https://doi.org/10.1111/ppl.13547 

[5] S. Hemmaphan and N. K. Bordeerat, "Genotoxic effects of lead and their impact on the expression of DNA repair genes," 
International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, vol. 19, no. 7, p. 4307, 2022.  
https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19074307 

[6] T. Ghosh, S. Mukherjee, and D. Adhikari, "Evaluation of acute toxicity studies on copper-induced oxidative stress in Lathyrus 
sativus L., (variety Ratan) germinating seeds: A biomarker based risk assessment," Journal of Advance Scientific Research, vol. 11, no. 
4, pp. 243-254, 2020.  https://doi.org/10.55218/JASR.202314601 

[7] D. Adhikari, "Chromium induces genotoxicity in root tip cells of grass pea (Lathyrus sativus L., Variety Nirmal): A ROS-mediated 
acute toxicity study," Journal of Stress Physiology & Biochemistry, vol. 17, no. 2, pp. 98-120, 2021.  

[8] D. Adhikari, R. Ghosh, and S. Dig, "Evaluation of salinity-mediated end-point cytogenotoxicity in Germinating Roots of Lathyrus 
sativus L., Variety Mahatora.: Bio-assay guided biomarker studies," Innovations in Agriculture, vol. 7, pp. 1-17, 2024.  
https://doi.org/10.3897/ia.2024.124263 

[9] D. Adhikari, T. Ghosh, and R. Ghosh, "A comprehensive comparative study on Cascabela thevetia (L.) lippold, seed aqueous 
extract-mediated escalation of abiotic stress and cellular genotoxicity: Insights from multivariate allelochemical analysis vis-a-vis 
employment of plant bioassays (Lathyrus sativus L., and Allium sativum L., germinating root tip cells)," Journal of Stress Physiology 
& Biochemistry, vol. 19, no. 4, pp. 178-202, 2023.  

[10] V. Santhy, N. Sandra, K. V. Ravishankar, and B. Chidambara, Molecular techniques for testing genetic purity and seed health. In: Dadlani, 
M., Yadava, D.K. (Eds.), Seed Science and Technology. Singapore. : Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-19-5888-5_15, 2023. 

[11] M. N. Khan, M. Mobin, Z. K. Abbas, K. A. AlMutairi, and Z. H. Siddiqui, "Role of nanomaterials in plants under challenging 
environments," Plant Physiology and Biochemistry, vol. 110, pp. 194-209, 2017.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.plaphy.2016.05.038 

[12] S. Sachdev and S. Ahmad, Role of nanomaterials in regulating oxidative stress in plants. In: Al-Khayri, J.M., Ansari, M.I., Singh, A.K. 
(Eds.), Nanobiotechnology Cham: Springer, 2021. 

[13] D. Adhikari, "Biotic and abiotic stresses and reactive oxygen species (ROS)-mediated signalling in higher plants: Regulatory 
mediators and their mechanism of actions," International Journal of Trend in Scientific Research and Development, pp. 2456-6470, 2024.  
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/380175331 

[14] D. Adhikari, "Plant heat shock proteins - origin, evolution and mechanism of action for biotechnological implications in crop 
improvement," International Journal of Innovative Research in Science, Engineering and Technology, vol. 13, no. 3, pp. 2758-2762, 2024.  
https://doi.org/10.15680/IJIRSET.2024.1303246 

[15] Kumar, "Impact of nanoparticles on oxidative stress and responsive antioxidant defence in plants," In: Tripathi DK, Ahmad P, 
Sharma S et al (eds) Nanomaterials inPlants, Algae and Microorganisms, vol. 1, pp. 393-406, 2018.  https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-
12-811487-2.00017-7 

[16] M. K. Ray et al., "Nanotechnology as a promising tool against phytopathogens: A futuristic approach to agriculture," Agriculture, 
vol. 13, no. 9, p. 1856, 2023.  https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture13091856 

[17] Y. N. Slavin and H. Bach, "Mechanisms of antifungal properties of metal nanoparticles," Nanomaterials, vol. 12, no. 24, p. 4470, 
2022.  https://doi.org/10.3390/nano12244470 

[18] Hazafa, "Nano-biopesticides as an emerging technology for pest management," IntechOpen, 2022.  
[19] M. M. Luzala et al., "A critical review of the antimicrobial and antibiofilm activities of green-synthesized plant-based metallic 

nanoparticles," Nanomaterials, vol. 12, no. 11, p. 1841, 2022.  https://doi.org/10.3390/nano12111841 
[20] E. S. Madivoli, P. G. Kareru, J. Gichuki, and M. M. Elbagoury, "Cellulose nanofibrils and silver nanoparticles enhances the 

mechanical and antimicrobial properties of polyvinyl alcohol nanocomposite film," Scientific Reports, vol. 12, no. 1, p. 19005, 2022.  
https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-23305-7 

[21] E. Baranowska-Wójcik, D. Szwajgier, and K. Gustaw, "Effect of TiO2 on selected pathogenic and opportunistic intestinal bacteria," 
Biological Trace Element Research, vol. 200, no. 5, pp. 2468–2474, 2022.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s12011-021-02843-7 

[22] D. Wang et al., "Nano-enabled pesticides for sustainable agriculture and global food security," Nature Nanotechnology, vol. 17, no. 4, 
pp. 347-360, 2022.  https://doi.org/10.1038/s41565-022-01082-8 

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2021.e08539
https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jafc.9b06615
https://doi.org/10.1080/17429145.2017.1310944
https://doi.org/10.1111/ppl.13547
https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19074307
https://doi.org/10.55218/JASR.202314601
https://doi.org/10.3897/ia.2024.124263
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-19-5888-5_15
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.plaphy.2016.05.038
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/380175331
https://doi.org/10.15680/IJIRSET.2024.1303246
https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-811487-2.00017-7
https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-811487-2.00017-7
https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture13091856
https://doi.org/10.3390/nano12244470
https://doi.org/10.3390/nano12111841
https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-23305-7
https://doi.org/10.1007/s12011-021-02843-7
https://doi.org/10.1038/s41565-022-01082-8


Agriculture and Food Sciences Research, 2024, 11(2): 203-221 

219 
© 2024 by the authors; licensee Asian Online Journal Publishing Group 

 

 

[23] M. Huston, M. DeBella, M. DiBella, and A. Gupta, "Green synthesis of nanomaterials," Nanomaterials, vol. 11, no. 8, p. 2130, 2021.  
https://doi.org/10.3390/nano11082130 

[24] F. Khan, M. Shariq, M. Asif, M. A. Siddiqui, P. Malan, and F. Ahmad, "Green nanotechnology: Plant-mediated nanoparticle 
synthesis and application," Nanomaterials, vol. 12, no. 4, p. 673, 2022.  https://doi.org/10.3390/nano12040673 

[25] A. Saka et al., "Biosynthesis of TiO2 nanoparticles by Caricaceae (Papaya) shell extracts for antifungal application," Scientific 
Reports, vol. 12, no. 1, p. 15960, 2022.  https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-19440-w 

[26] B. S. Das, A. Das, A. Mishra, and M. Arakha, "Microbial cells as biological factory for nanoparticle synthesis," Frontiers of Materials 
Science, vol. 15, pp. 177-191, 2021.  

[27] A. Antonio-Pérez, L. F. Durán-Armenta, M. G. Pérez-Loredo, and A. L. Torres-Huerta, "Biosynthesis of copper nanoparticles with 
medicinal plants extracts: from extraction methods to applications," Micromachines, vol. 14, no. 10, p. 1882, 2023.  
https://doi.org/10.3390/mi14101882 

[28] M. M. Alkhulaifi et al., "Green synthesis of silver nanoparticles using Citrus limon peels and evaluation of their antibacterial and 
cytotoxic properties," Saudi Journal of Biological Sciences, vol. 27, no. 12, pp. 3434-3441, 2020.  
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sjbs.2020.09.031 

[29] A. Yaqub et al., "Novel biosynthesis of copper nanoparticles using Zingiber and Allium sp. with synergic effect of doxycycline for 
anticancer and bactericidal activity," Current Microbiology, vol. 77, pp. 2287-2299, 2020.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00284-020-
02058-4 

[30] Y. S. Yashwant, V. Sharma, T. Barupal, and J. Banu, "Efficacy of nanoparticles in plant disease control and their phytotoxicity: 
Nanoparticles in phytopathology," Biomaterials Journal, vol. 2, no. 2, pp. 1-15, 2023.  

[31] M. Zhang et al., "High stability au nps: From design to application in nanomedicine," International Journal of Nanomedicine, vol. 16, 
pp. 6067-6094, 2021.  https://doi.org/10.2147/IJN.S322900 

[32] B. Bhau, S. Ghosh, S. Puri, B. Borah, D. Sarmah, and R. Khan, "Green synthesis of gold nanoparticles from the leaf extract of 
Nepenthes khasiana and antimicrobial assay," Advanced Materials Letters, vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 55-58, 2015.  
https://doi.org/10.5185/amlett.2015.5609 

[33] S. A. Kumari, A. K. Patlolla, and P. Madhusudhanachary, "Biosynthesis of silver nanoparticles using Azadirachta indica and their 
antioxidant and anticancer effects in cell lines," Micromachines, vol. 13, no. 9, p. 1416, 2022.  https://doi.org/10.3390/mi13091416 

[34] J. Maruthai, A. Muthukumarasamy, and B. Baskaran, "Fabrication and characterisation of silver nanoparticles using bract extract 
of Musa paradisiaca for its synergistic combating effect on phytopathogens, free radical scavenging activity, and catalytic 
efficiency," IET Nanobiotechnology, vol. 13, no. 2, pp. 134-143, 2019.  

[35] H. Umar, M. R. Aliyu, and D. U. Ozsahin, "Iron oxide nanoparticles synthesized using Mentha spicata extract and evaluation of its 
antibacterial, cytotoxicity and antimigratory potential on highly metastatic human breast cells," Biomedical Physics & Engineering 
Express, vol. 10, no. 3, p. 035019, 2024.  https://doi.org/10.1088/2057-1976/ad3646 

[36] M. Guilger-Casagrande and R. d. Lima, "Synthesis of silver nanoparticles mediated by fungi: A review," Frontiers in Bioengineering 
and Biotechnology, vol. 7, p. 287, 2019.  https://doi.org/10.3389/fbioe.2019.00287 

[37] K. I. Alsamhary, "Eco-friendly synthesis of silver nanoparticles by Bacillus subtilis and their antibacterial activity," Saudi Journal of 
Biological Sciences, vol. 27, no. 8, pp. 2185-2191, 2020.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sjbs.2020.04.026 

[38] N. H. Nam and N. H. Luong, "Nanoparticles: Synthesis and applications," Materials for Biomedical Engineering, pp. 211-240, 2019.  
https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-08-102814-8.00008-1 

[39] R. Mascarenhas, S. Hegde, and N. Manaktala, "Chitosan nanoparticle applications in dentistry: A sustainable biopolymer," Frontiers 
in Chemistry, vol. 12, p. 1362482, 2024.  https://doi.org/10.3389/fchem.2024.1362482 

[40] S. Gaba, A. K. Rai, A. Varma, R. Prasad, and A. Goel, "Biocontrol potential of mycogenic copper oxide nanoparticles against 
Alternaria brassicae," Frontiers in Chemistry, vol. 10, p. 966396, 2022.  https://doi.org/10.3389/fchem.2022 

[41] P. U. Ingle et al., "Chitosan nanoparticles (ChNPs): A versatile growth promoter in modern agricultural production," Heliyon, vol. 
8, no. 11, 2022.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2022.e11893 

[42] W. Huang, H. Pan, Z. Hu, M. Wang, L. Wu, and F. Zhang, "A functional bimodal mesoporous silica nanoparticle with 
redox/cellulase dual-responsive gatekeepers for controlled release of fungicide," Scientific Reports, vol. 13, no. 1, p. 802, 2023.  
https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-27396-8 

[43] G. E. Yılmaz, I. Göktürk, M. Ovezova, F. Yılmaz, S. Kılıç, and A. Denizli, "Antimicrobial nanomaterials: A review," Hygiene, vol. 3, 
no. 3, pp. 269-290, 2023.  

[44] L. He, Y. Liu, A. Mustapha, and M. Lin, "Antifungal activity of zinc oxide nanoparticles against Botrytis cinerea and Penicillium 
expansum," Microbiological Research, vol. 166, no. 3, pp. 207-215, 2011.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.micres.2010.03.003 

[45] H. Mohd Yusof, R. Mohamad, U. H. Zaidan, and N. A. Abdul Rahman, "Microbial synthesis of zinc oxide nanoparticles and their 
potential application as an antimicrobial agent and a feed supplement in animal industry: A review," Journal of Animal Science and 
Biotechnology, vol. 10, pp. 1-22, 2019.  

[46] T. Bruna, F. Maldonado-Bravo, P. Jara, and N. Caro, "Silver nanoparticles and their antibacterial applications," International 
Journal of Molecular Sciences, vol. 22, no. 13, p. 7202, 2021.  https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms22137202 

[47] S. M. Yakout and A. A. Mostafa, "A novel green synthesis of silver nanoparticles using soluble starch and its antibacterial activity," 
International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Medicine, vol. 8, no. 3, pp. 3538-3544, 2015.  

[48] R. J. Holmila, S. A. Vance, S. B. King, A. W. Tsang, R. Singh, and C. M. Furdui, "Silver nanoparticles induce mitochondrial protein 
oxidation in lung cells impacting cell cycle and proliferation," Antioxidants, vol. 8, no. 11, p. 552, 2019.  
https://doi.org/10.3390/antiox8110552 

[49] A. E. Mohammed, F. F. Bin Baz, and J. S. Albrahim, "Calligonum comosum and Fusarium sp. extracts as bio-mediator in silver 
nanoparticles formation: Characterization, antioxidant and antibacterial capability," 3 Biotech, vol. 8, no. 1, p. 72, 2018.  
https://doi.org/10.1007/s13205-017-1046-5 

[50] S. Khan et al., "Biosynthesis and characterization of iron oxide nanoparticles from Mentha spicata and screening its combating 
potential against Phytophthora infestans," Frontiers in Plant Science, vol. 13, p. 1001499, 2022.  
https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2022.1001499 

[51] V. Malapermal, I. Botha, S. B. N. Krishna, and J. N. Mbatha, "Enhancing antidiabetic and antimicrobial performance of Ocimum 
basilicum, and Ocimum sanctum (L.) using silver nanoparticles," Saudi Journal of Biological Sciences, vol. 24, no. 6, pp. 1294-1305, 
2017.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sjbs.2015.06.026 

[52] M. M. Elsharkawy and A. Derbalah, "Antiviral activity of titanium dioxide nanostructures as a control strategy for broad bean 
strain virus in faba bean," Pest Management Science, vol. 75, no. 3, pp. 828-834, 2019.  https://doi.org/10.1002/ps.5185 

[53] R. Singh, M. Kuddus, P. K. Singh, and D. Choden, "Nanotechnology for nanophytopathogens: From detection to the management 
of plant viruses," BioMed Research International, vol. 2022, no. 1, p. 8688584, 2022.  https://doi.org/10.1155/2022/8688584 

[54] P. K. Kulabhusan, A. Tripathi, and K. Kant, "Gold nanoparticles and plant pathogens: An overview and prospective for biosensing 
in forestry," Sensors, vol. 22, no. 3, p. 1259, 2022.  https://doi.org/10.3390/s22031259 

[55] L. Wang, Z. Liu, X. Xia, C. Yang, J. Huang, and S. Wan, "Colorimetric detection of Cucumber green mottle mosaic virus using 
unmodified gold nanoparticles as colorimetric probes," Journal of Virological Methods, vol. 243, pp. 113-119, 2017.  
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jviromet.2017.01.010 

[56] A. Varympopi et al., "Antibacterial activity of copper nanoparticles against Xanthomonas campestris pv. vesicatoria in tomato 
plants," International Journal of Molecular Sciences, vol. 23, no. 8, p. 4080, 2022.  https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms23084080 

[57] S. M. Kamel et al., "Antifungal activity of copper oxide nanoparticles against root rot disease in cucumber," Journal of Fungi, vol. 8, 
no. 9, p. 911, 2022.  https://doi.org/10.3390/jof8090911 

[58] A. Varympopi et al., "Bactericides based on copper nanoparticles restrain growth of important plant pathogens," Pathogens, vol. 9, 
no. 12, p. 1024, 2020.  https://doi.org/10.3390/pathogens9121024 

[59] M. J. Woźniak-Budych, K. Staszak, and M. Staszak, "Copper and copper-based nanoparticles in medicine—perspectives and 
challenges," Molecules, vol. 28, no. 18, p. 6687, 2023.  https://doi.org/10.3390/molecules28186687 

https://doi.org/10.3390/nano11082130
https://doi.org/10.3390/nano12040673
https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-19440-w
https://doi.org/10.3390/mi14101882
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sjbs.2020.09.031
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00284-020-02058-4
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00284-020-02058-4
https://doi.org/10.2147/IJN.S322900
https://doi.org/10.5185/amlett.2015.5609
https://doi.org/10.3390/mi13091416
https://doi.org/10.1088/2057-1976/ad3646
https://doi.org/10.3389/fbioe.2019.00287
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sjbs.2020.04.026
https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-08-102814-8.00008-1
https://doi.org/10.3389/fchem.2024.1362482
https://doi.org/10.3389/fchem.2022
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2022.e11893
https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-27396-8
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.micres.2010.03.003
https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms22137202
https://doi.org/10.3390/antiox8110552
https://doi.org/10.1007/s13205-017-1046-5
https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2022.1001499
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sjbs.2015.06.026
https://doi.org/10.1002/ps.5185
https://doi.org/10.1155/2022/8688584
https://doi.org/10.3390/s22031259
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jviromet.2017.01.010
https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms23084080
https://doi.org/10.3390/jof8090911
https://doi.org/10.3390/pathogens9121024
https://doi.org/10.3390/molecules28186687


Agriculture and Food Sciences Research, 2024, 11(2): 203-221 

220 
© 2024 by the authors; licensee Asian Online Journal Publishing Group 

 

 

[60] A. Andreadelli et al., "Effects of magnesium oxide and magnesium hydroxide microparticle foliar treatment on tomato pr gene 
expression and leaf microbiome," Microorganisms, vol. 9, no. 6, p. 1217, 2021.  https://doi.org/10.3390/microorganisms9061217 

[61] S. Sharmin, M. Rahaman, C. Sarkar, O. Atolani, M. Islam, and O. Adeyemi, "Nanoparticles as antimicrobial and antiviral agents: A 
literature-based perspective study," Heliyon, vol. 7, no. 3, pp. e06456-e06456, 2021.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2021.e06456 

[62] P. Dutta et al., "Advances in nanotechnology as a potential alternative for plant viral disease management," Frontiers in 
Microbiology, vol. 13, p. 935193, 2022.  https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2022.935193 

[63] O. Chlumsky et al., "Antimicrobial properties of palladium and platinum nanoparticles: A new tool for combating food-borne 
pathogens," International Journal of Molecular Sciences, vol. 22, no. 15, p. 7892, 2021.  https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms22157892 

[64] S. V. Gudkov, D. E. Burmistrov, V. V. Smirnova, A. A. Semenova, and A. B. Lisitsyn, "A mini review of antibacterial properties of 
Al2O3 nanoparticles," Nanomaterials, vol. 12, no. 15, p. 2635, 2022.  https://doi.org/10.3390/nano12152635 

[65] O. L. Pop et al., "Cerium oxide nanoparticles and their efficient antibacterial application in vitro against gram-positive and gram-
negative pathogens," Nanomaterials, vol. 10, no. 8, p. 1614, 2020.  https://doi.org/10.3390/nano10081614 

[66] M. Vahedi, N. Hosseini-Jazani, S. Yousefi, and M. Ghahremani, "Evaluation of anti-bacterial effects of nickel nanoparticles on 
biofilm production by Staphylococcus epidermidis," Iranian Journal of Microbiology, vol. 9, no. 3, pp. 160–168, 2017.  

[67] A. Shcherban, "Chitosan and its derivatives as promising plant protection products," Vavilov Journal of Genetics and Breeding, vol. 
27, no. 8, pp. 1010-1021, 2023.  

[68] K. A. Altammar, "A review on nanoparticles: Characteristics, synthesis, applications, and challenges," Frontiers in microbiology, vol. 
14, p. 1155622, 2023.  https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2023.1155622 

[69] S. Behzadi et al., "Cellular uptake of nanoparticles: Journey inside the cell," Chemical Society Reviews, vol. 46, no. 14, pp. 4218-4244, 
2017.  https://doi.org/10.1039/c6cs00636a 

[70] L. Valgimigli, "Lipid peroxidation and antioxidant protection," Biomolecules vol. 13, p. 1291, 2023.  
https://doi.org/10.3390/biom13091291 

[71] D. Bandyopadhyay and D. Adhikari, "Agronano-mediated applications for the alleviation of stress and boosting of crop health for 
the future of smart high-yield agriculture," Biological Sciences, vol. 4, no. 3, pp. 681-691, 2024.  
https://doi.org/10.55006/biolsciences.2024.4304 

[72] M. N. Hossen, B. Murphy, L. Garcı́a-Hevia, R. Bhattacharya, and P. Mukherjee, "Probing cellular processes using engineered 
nanoparticles," Bioconjugate Chemistry, vol. 29, no. 6, pp. 1793-1808, 2018.  https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.bioconjchem.8b00026 

[73] S. Attarilar et al., "The toxicity phenomenon and the related occurrence in metal and metal oxide nanoparticles: A brief review from 
the biomedical perspective," Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology, vol. 8, p. 822, 2020.  
https://doi.org/10.3389/fbioe.2020.00822 

[74] C. Liao, Y. Li, and S. C. Tjong, "Bactericidal and cytotoxic properties of silver nanoparticles," International Journal of Molecular 
Sciences, vol. 20, no. 2, p. 449, 2019.  https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms20020449 

[75] S. Yin, J. Liu, Y. Kang, Y. Lin, D. Li, and L. Shao, "Interactions of nanomaterials with ion channels and related mechanisms," 
British Journal of Pharmacology, vol. 176, no. 19, pp. 3754-3774, 2019.  https://doi.org/10.1111/bph.14792 

[76] P. P. Fu, Q. Xia, H.-M. Hwang, P. C. Ray, and H. Yu, "Mechanisms of nanotoxicity: Generation of reactive oxygen species," 
Journal of Food and Drug Analysis, vol. 22, no. 1, pp. 64-75, 2014.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfda.2014.01.005 

[77] J. Ramos-Zúñiga, N. Bruna, and J. M. Pérez-Donoso, "Toxicity mechanisms of copper nanoparticles and copper surfaces on 
bacterial cells and viruses," International Journal of Molecular Sciences, vol. 24, no. 13, p. 10503, 2023.  
https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms241310503 

[78] B. Ekram et al., "Cell migration, DNA fragmentation and antibacterial properties of novel silver doped calcium polyphosphate 
nanoparticles," Scientific Reports, vol. 14, no. 1, p. 565, 2024.  https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-50849-z/ 

[79] R. Singh, S. Cheng, and S. Singh, "Oxidative stress-mediated genotoxic effect of zinc oxide nanoparticles on Deinococcus 
radiodurans," 3 Biotech, vol. 10, no. 2, p. 66, 2020.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s13205-020-2054-4 

[80] D. H. Atha et al., "Copper oxide nanoparticle mediated DNA damage in terrestrial plant models," Environmental Science & 
Technology, vol. 46, no. 3, pp. 1819-1827, 2012.  https://doi.org/10.1021/es202660k 

[81] O. Gordon et al., "Silver coordination polymers for prevention of implant infection: Thiol interaction, impact on respiratory chain 
enzymes, and hydroxyl radical induction," Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy, vol. 54, no. 10, pp. 4208-4218, 2010.  
https://doi.org/10.1128/AAC.01830-09 

[82] E. O. Mikhailova, "Silver nanoparticles: Mechanism of action and probable bio-application," Journal of Functional Biomaterials, vol. 
11, no. 4, p. 84, 2020.  https://doi.org/10.3390/jfb11040084 

[83] T. Ghosh and D. Adhikari, ROS-mediated genome alterations at cellular microenvironment during cancer metastasis: A curtain raiser. In 
Handbook of Oxidative Stress in Cancer: Mechanistic Aspects. Singapore: Springer Singapore, 2021. 

[84] S. Dumont and J. Rivoal, "Consequences of oxidative stress on plant glycolytic and respiratory metabolism," Frontiers in Plant 
Science, vol. 10, p. 166, 2019.  https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2019.00166 

[85] M. Chaki, J. C. Begara-Morales, and J. B. Barroso, "Oxidative stress in plants," Antioxidants (Basel, Switzerland), vol. 9, no. 6, p. 481, 
2020.  https://doi.org/10.3390/antiox9060481 

[86] M. Hasanuzzaman et al., "Reactive oxygen species and antioxidant defense in plants under abiotic stress: Revisiting the crucial role 
of a universal defense regulator," Antioxidants, vol. 9, no. 8, p. 681, 2020.  https://doi.org/10.3390/antiox9080681 

[87] G. Pizzino et al., "Oxidative stress: Harms and benefits for human health," Oxidative Medicine and Cellular Longevity, vol. 2017, no. 1, 
p. 8416763, 2017.  https://doi.org/10.1155/2017/8416763 

[88] D. Adhikari and S. Karmakar, "In vitro pro-inflammatory activity and associated pharmacological activities of paracondylactis 
indicus Dave," Nematocyst Venom. Pharmacologia, vol. 9, pp. 114-121, 2018.  

[89] P. Irato and G. Santovito, "Enzymatic and non-enzymatic molecules with antioxidant function," Antioxidants (Basel, Switzerland), 
vol. 10, no. 4, p. 579, 2021.  https://doi.org/10.3390/antiox10040579 

[90] N. N. Rudenko, D. V. Vetoshkina, T. V. Marenkova, and M. M. Borisova-Mubarakshina, "Antioxidants of non-enzymatic nature: 
Their function in higher plant cells and the ways of boosting their biosynthesis," Antioxidants, vol. 12, no. 11, p. 2014, 2023.  
https://doi.org/10.3390/antiox12112014 

[91] S. Samanta et al., "Pharmacological and biochemical studies on Telescopium telescopium–a marine mollusk from the Mangrove 
regions," Oriental Pharmacy and Experimental Medicine, vol. 8, pp. 386-394, 2008.  https://doi.org/10.3742/opem.2008.8.4.386 

[92] P. Ballikaya et al., "First evidence of nanoparticle uptake through leaves and roots in beech (Fagus sylvatica L.) and pine (Pinus 
sylvestris L.)," Tree Physiology, vol. 43, no. 2, pp. 262-276, 2023.  https://doi.org/10.1093/treephys/tpac117 

[93] H. K. Chandrashekar et al., "Nanoparticle-mediated amelioration of drought stress in plants: A systematic review," 3 Biotech, vol. 
13, no. 10, p. 336, 2023.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s13205-023-03751-4 

[94] P. Sabourian et al., "Effect of physico-chemical properties of nanoparticles on their intracellular uptake," International Journal of 
Molecular Sciences, vol. 21, no. 21, p. 8019, 2020.  https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms21218019 

[95] H. Wu and Z. Li, "Nano-enabled agriculture: How do nanoparticles cross barriers in plants?," Plant Communications, vol. 3, no. 6, 
pp. 100346-100346, 2022.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.xplc.2022.100346 

[96] L. A. Paramo, A. A. Feregrino-Pérez, R. Guevara, S. Mendoza, and K. Esquivel, "Nanoparticles in agroindustry: Applications, 
toxicity, challenges, and trends," Nanomaterials, vol. 10, no. 9, p. 1654, 2020.  https://doi.org/10.3390/nano10091654 

[97] K. Le Gal, E. E. Schmidt, and V. I. Sayin, "Cellular redox homeostasis," Antioxidants, vol. 10, no. 9, p. 1377, 2021.  
https://doi.org/10.3390/antiox10091377 

[98] M. Rizwan et al., "Effect of foliar applications of silicon and titanium dioxide nanoparticles on growth, oxidative stress, and 
cadmium accumulation by rice (Oryza sativa)," Acta Physiologiae Plantarum, vol. 41, pp. 1-12, 2019.  
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11738-019-2828-7 

[99] A. P. Mathew, P. Viswajith, A. Rahman, and V. Murali, "Crop disease detection using machine learning," Journal of Applied Science, 
Engineering, Technology and Management, vol. 1, no. 01, pp. 28-32, 2023.  https://doi.org/10.61779/jasetm.v1i1.6 

https://doi.org/10.3390/microorganisms9061217
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2021.e06456
https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2022.935193
https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms22157892
https://doi.org/10.3390/nano12152635
https://doi.org/10.3390/nano10081614
https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2023.1155622
https://doi.org/10.1039/c6cs00636a
https://doi.org/10.3390/biom13091291
https://doi.org/10.55006/biolsciences.2024.4304
https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.bioconjchem.8b00026
https://doi.org/10.3389/fbioe.2020.00822
https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms20020449
https://doi.org/10.1111/bph.14792
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfda.2014.01.005
https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms241310503
https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-50849-z/
https://doi.org/10.1007/s13205-020-2054-4
https://doi.org/10.1021/es202660k
https://doi.org/10.1128/AAC.01830-09
https://doi.org/10.3390/jfb11040084
https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2019.00166
https://doi.org/10.3390/antiox9060481
https://doi.org/10.3390/antiox9080681
https://doi.org/10.1155/2017/8416763
https://doi.org/10.3390/antiox10040579
https://doi.org/10.3390/antiox12112014
https://doi.org/10.3742/opem.2008.8.4.386
https://doi.org/10.1093/treephys/tpac117
https://doi.org/10.1007/s13205-023-03751-4
https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms21218019
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.xplc.2022.100346
https://doi.org/10.3390/nano10091654
https://doi.org/10.3390/antiox10091377
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11738-019-2828-7
https://doi.org/10.61779/jasetm.v1i1.6


Agriculture and Food Sciences Research, 2024, 11(2): 203-221 

221 
© 2024 by the authors; licensee Asian Online Journal Publishing Group 

 

 

[100] G. Tortella et al., "Nanoparticles as a promising strategy to mitigate biotic stress in agriculture," Antibiotics, vol. 12, no. 2, p. 338, 
2023.  https://doi.org/10.3390/antibiotics12020338 

[101] K. Shivashakarappa, V. Reddy, V. K. Tupakula, A. Farnian, A. Vuppula, and R. Gunnaiah, "Nanotechnology for the detection of 
plant pathogens," Plant Nano Biology, vol. 2, p. 100018, 2022.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.plana.2022.100018 

[102] P. R. More, S. Pandit, A. D. Filippis, G. Franci, I. Mijakovic, and M. Galdiero, "Silver nanoparticles: Bactericidal and mechanistic 
approach against drug resistant pathogens," Microorganisms, vol. 11, no. 2, p. 369, 2023.  
https://doi.org/10.3390/microorganisms11020369 

[103] Y. Shang, M. K. Hasan, G. J. Ahammed, M. Li, H. Yin, and J. Zhou, "Applications of nanotechnology in plant growth and crop 
protection: A review," Molecules, vol. 24, no. 14, p. 2558, 2019.  https://doi.org/10.3390/molecules24142558 

[104] M. F. Hamdan, S. N. Mohd Noor, N. Abd-Aziz, T.-L. Pua, and B. C. Tan, "Green revolution to gene revolution: Technological 
advances in agriculture to feed the world," Plants, vol. 11, no. 10, p. 1297, 2022.  https://doi.org/10.3390/plants11101297 

[105] D. T. Donia and M. Carbone, "Seed priming with zinc oxide nanoparticles to enhance crop tolerance to environmental stresses," 
International Journal of Molecular Sciences, vol. 24, no. 24, p. 17612, 2023.  https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms242417612 

[106] F. J. Cunningham, N. S. Goh, G. S. Demirer, J. L. Matos, and M. P. Landry, "Nanoparticle-mediated delivery towards advancing 
plant genetic engineering," Trends in Biotechnology, vol. 36, no. 9, pp. 882-897, 2018.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tibtech.2018.03.009 

[107] F. Zhu et al., "Study on the role of phytohormones in resistance to watermelon Fusarium wilt," Plants, vol. 11, no. 2, p. 156, 2022.  
https://doi.org/10.3390/plants11020156 

[108] A. Chen, L. Halilovic, J.-H. Shay, A. Koch, N. Mitter, and H. Jin, "Improving RNA-based crop protection through nanotechnology 
and insights from cross-kingdom RNA trafficking," Current Opinion in Plant Biology, vol. 76, p. 102441, 2023.  
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pbi.2023.102441 

[109] M. S. Draz et al., "Nanoparticle-mediated systemic delivery of siRNA for treatment of cancers and viral infections," Theranostics, 
vol. 4, no. 9, p. 872, 2014.  https://doi.org/10.7150/thno.9404 

[110] A. B. Kutawa et al., "Trends in nanotechnology and its potentialities to control plant pathogenic fungi: A review," Biology, vol. 10, 
no. 9, p. 881, 2021.  https://doi.org/10.3390/biology10090881 

[111] F. Zhu et al., "Uptake and distribution of fenoxanil-loaded mesoporous silica nanoparticles in rice plants," International Journal of 
Molecular Sciences, vol. 19, no. 10, p. 2854, 2018.  https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms19102854 

[112] M. Noman et al., "Nano-enabled crop resilience against pathogens: potential, mechanisms and strategies," Crop Health, vol. 1, no. 1, 
p. 15, 2023.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s44297-023-00015-8 

[113] A. C. Preisler, A. E. Pereira, E. V. Campos, G. Dalazen, L. F. Fraceto, and H. C. Oliveira, "Atrazine nanoencapsulation improves 

pre‐emergence herbicidal activity against Bidens pilosa without enhancing long‐term residual effect on Glycine max," Pest 
Management Science, vol. 76, no. 1, pp. 141-149, 2020.  https://doi.org/10.1002/ps.5482 

[114] A. M. Regina et al., "Thiamethoxam used as nanopesticide for the effective management of Diaphorina citri psyllid: An 
environmental-friendly formulation," International Journal of Pest Management, pp. 1-9, 2022.  
https://doi.org/10.1080/09670874.2022.2042425 

[115] S. Akbar, Y. Wei, and M.-Q. Zhang, "RNA interference: promising approach to combat plant viruses," International Journal of 
Molecular Sciences, vol. 23, no. 10, p. 5312, 2022.  https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms23105312 

[116] N. Mammari, E. Lamouroux, A. Boudier, and R. E. Duval, "Current knowledge on the oxidative-stress-mediated antimicrobial 
properties of metal-based nanoparticles," Microorganisms, vol. 10, no. 2, p. 437, 2022.  
https://doi.org/10.3390/microorganisms10020437 

[117] F. Zhang, Z. Wang, W. J. Peijnenburg, and M. G. Vijver, "Review and prospects on the ecotoxicity of mixtures of nanoparticles 
and hybrid nanomaterials," Environmental Science & Technology, vol. 56, no. 22, pp. 15238-15250, 2022.  
https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.2c03333 

[118] K. Szewczyk-Golec, M. Pawłowska, R. Wesołowski, M. Wróblewski, and C. Mila-Kierzenkowska, "Oxidative stress as a possible 
target in the treatment of toxoplasmosis: Perspectives and ambiguities," International Journal of Molecular Sciences, vol. 22, no. 11, p. 
5705, 2021.  https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms22115705 

[119] A. Pradhan, S. Seena, C. Pascoal, and F. Cássio, "Can metal nanoparticles be a threat to microbial decomposers of plant litter in 
streams?," Microbial Ecology, vol. 62, pp. 58-68, 2011.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00248-011-9861-4 

[120] K. Singh and N. Fatima, "The efficiency of earthworms as a biomarker for environmental pollution," The International Journal of 
Biological Innovations, vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 104-112, 2022.  https://doi.org/10.46505/ijbi.2022.4111 

[121] Z. Li, T. Yu, R. Paul, J. Fan, Y. Yang, and Q. Wei, "Agricultural nanodiagnostics for plant diseases: Recent advances and 
challenges," Nanoscale Advances, vol. 2, no. 8, pp. 3083-3094, 2020.  

[122] H. Y. Lau, H. Wu, E. J. Wee, M. Trau, Y. Wang, and J. R. Botella, "Specific and sensitive isothermal electrochemical biosensor for 
plant pathogen DNA detection with colloidal gold nanoparticles as probes," Scientific Reports, vol. 7, no. 1, p. 38896, 2017.  
https://doi.org/10.1038/srep38896 

[123] P. Das and D. Adhikari, "Role of epigenetics and the high-throughput sensing techniques to detect stress adaptation mechanisms in 
crop plants: A mini review," Innovations in Agriculture, vol. 6, p. e32855, 2023.  https://doi.org/10.25081/ia.2023-1986 

[124] F. Ameen, K. Alsamhary, J. A. Alabdullatif, and S. ALNadhari, "A review on metal-based nanoparticles and their toxicity to 
beneficial soil bacteria and fungi," Ecotoxicology and Environmental Safety, vol. 213, p. 112027, 2021.  
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoenv.2021.112027 

[125] P. Zhang et al., "Graphene oxide-induced pH alteration, iron overload, and subsequent oxidative damage in rice (Oryza sativa L.): A 
new mechanism of nanomaterial phytotoxicity," Environmental Science & Technology, vol. 54, no. 6, pp. 3181-3190, 2020.  
https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.9b05794 

[126] G. Pallas, W. J. Peijnenburg, J. B. Guinée, R. Heijungs, and M. G. Vijver, "Green and clean: Reviewing the justification of claims 
for nanomaterials from a sustainability point of view," Sustainability, vol. 10, no. 3, p. 689, 2018.  
https://doi.org/10.3390/su10030689 

[127] C. An et al., "Nanomaterials and nanotechnology for the delivery of agrochemicals: Strategies towards sustainable agriculture," 
Journal of Nanobiotechnology, vol. 20, no. 1, p. 11, 2022.  https://doi.org/10.1186/s12951-021-01214-7 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Asian Online Journal Publishing Group is not responsible or answerable for any loss, damage or liability, etc. caused in relation to/arising out of the use of the content. 
Any queries should be directed to the corresponding author of the article. 
 

https://doi.org/10.3390/antibiotics12020338
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.plana.2022.100018
https://doi.org/10.3390/microorganisms11020369
https://doi.org/10.3390/molecules24142558
https://doi.org/10.3390/plants11101297
https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms242417612
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tibtech.2018.03.009
https://doi.org/10.3390/plants11020156
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pbi.2023.102441
https://doi.org/10.7150/thno.9404
https://doi.org/10.3390/biology10090881
https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms19102854
https://doi.org/10.1007/s44297-023-00015-8
https://doi.org/10.1002/ps.5482
https://doi.org/10.1080/09670874.2022.2042425
https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms23105312
https://doi.org/10.3390/microorganisms10020437
https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.2c03333
https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms22115705
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00248-011-9861-4
https://doi.org/10.46505/ijbi.2022.4111
https://doi.org/10.1038/srep38896
https://doi.org/10.25081/ia.2023-1986
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoenv.2021.112027
https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.9b05794
https://doi.org/10.3390/su10030689
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12951-021-01214-7

