IntechOpen

Home > Books > Abiotic Stress in Plants - Adaptations to Climate Change

Open access peer-reviewed chapter

Improvement of Abiotic Stress Tolerance in Plants with the Application of Nanoparticles

Written By

Saba Nawaz, Iqra Maqsood, Fatima Batool, Zainab Y. Sandhu, Sameera Hassan, Faheem Akram and Bushra Rashid

Submitted: 08 December 2022 Reviewed: 25 January 2023 Published: 10 March 2023

DOI: 10.5772/intechopen.110201

Abiotic Stress in Plants IntechOpen
Abiotic Stress in Plants Adaptations to Climate Change Edited by Manuel Oliveira

From the Edited Volume

Abiotic Stress in Plants - Adaptations to Climate Change

Edited by Manuel Oliveira and Anabela Fernandes-Silva

Book Details Order Print

Chapter metrics overview

293 Chapter Downloads

View Full Metrics
Advertisement

Abstract

Plants are under the threat of climatic changes and there is a reduction in productivity and deterioration in quality. The application of nanoparticles is one of the recent approaches to improve plant yield and quality traits. A number of nanoparticles, such as zinc nanoparticles (ZnO NPs), iron nanoparticles (Fe2O3 NPs), silicon nanoparticles (SiO2 NPs), cerium nanoparticles (CeO2 NPs), silver nanoparticles (Ag NPs), titanium dioxide nanoparticles (TiO2 NPs), and carbon nanoparticles (C NPs), have been reported in different plant species to play a role to improve the plant physiology and metabolic pathways under environmental stresses. Crop plants readily absorb the nanoparticles through the cellular machinery of different tissues and organs to take part in metabolic and growth processes. Nanoparticles promote the activity of a range of antioxidant enzymes, including catalase (CAT), peroxidase (POD), and superoxide dismutase (SOD), in plant species, which in turn improve the growth and development under stressful conditions. The present review focuses on the mode of action and signaling of nanoparticles to the plant systems and their positive impact on growth, development, and ROS scavenging potential. The appropriate elucidation on mechanisms of nanoparticles in plants leads to better growth and yields under stress conditions, which will ultimately lead to increased agricultural production.

Keywords

  • agriculture
  • climatic challenges
  • crop development
  • food security
  • nanotechnology

1. Introduction

Population of the globe is rising and is predicted to reach almost 9.6 billion by the year 2050. Sustained growth of 70–100% in global agricultural and food production is essential to feed the growing population [1]. The area under cultivation may shrink over time due to the increasing nonagricultural uses of the land and urbanization, making it difficult to increase agricultural production [2]. Plants are constantly exposed to environmental changes during their life cycle. Deteriorating soil health conditions inevitably have a detrimental impact on plant development and productivity [3]. Billions of dollars worth of crops are being destroyed each year due to abiotic stresses, such as salinity and drought. Prior to the advent of efficient selection techniques, conventional breeding was used to maintain agricultural productivity, but its effectiveness was constrained by the diversity of stress tolerance traits [2]. Determining innovative solutions to reduce abiotic stress challenges and maintain food security is therefore urgently required under these deteriorating environmental conditions [1] as most promising approach currently available is nanotechnology.

To improve abiotic stress tolerance in agricultural biosystems, Eric Drexler initially coined the term “Nanotechnology” [4]. It deals with the study of nanostructures that possess diverse physicochemical properties and biochemical activities that are dependent on their surface-to-volume ratio [5]. Different physical, chemical, and biological processes can be used to manufacture nanoparticles (NPs), and they can interact with plants in a variety of ways [6]. Crop plants readily absorb NPs, which can enter the cells and play crucial roles in metabolic and growth processes [7]. There is a surge in the use of nanobiotechnology tools in agricultural production that has the potential to boost plant metabolism since NPs promote plant growth, development, and yield to withstand environmental stresses [8]. Additionally, it has been observed that NPs promote the activity of a range of antioxidant enzymes, including catalase (CAT), peroxidase (POD), and superoxide dismutase (SOD) [9]. Extensive research revealed that NPs are crucial for plants dealing with abiotic stress conditions [10].

Nanobiotechnology will improve plant functions that will help them cope with environmental challenges [11]. Therefore, this technology is strongly encouraged due to the rising global food demand as well as the potential for positive effects on the economy and ecology [12]. Despite its extraordinary potential in the enhancement of agricultural productivity and improvement in abiotic stress tolerance, the wider application of nanotechnology at the field level is limited in agriculture. In this review article, updates on the positive effects of nanotechnology for the improvement of abiotic stresses in crops have been discussed in detail.

Advertisement

2. Role of nanoparticles in salinity stress

Salinity has a negative impact on crops in various physiological and biochemical processes that decrease crop production drastically [13]. Water scarcity in the soil causes low osmotic potential and ionic toxicity of Cl− and Na+ in plant cells [14]. It is also seen that salt stress results in decreased concentration of photosynthetic pigments, reduced stomatal flow, lack of efficiency of photosystem II, and increased production of ROS.

2.1 Zinc nanoparticles (ZnO NPs)

Salt stress causes chlorophyll concentration leads to membrane disintegration and the rate of photosynthesis is significantly decreased. It also causes injury in thylakoid and grana that results in limited starch content [15]. Lupine (Luminus termis) was protected in saline conditions by priming with ZnO NPs, which enhanced the photosynthetic pigments, antioxidant responses, and growth [16]. ZnO NPs treatment also increased the antioxidant enzymes in Zea mays [17]. When Abelmoschus esculentus was treated with ZnO NPs, it increased the SOD and CAT activities and photosynthetic pigment [18]. Canola (Brassica napus) plant treated with ZnO NPs, alleviated the harmful effects of salt by upregulating the osmolyte biosynthesis, ionic regulation, and antioxidant system under saline conditions [19]. Gossypium hirsutum plants treated with ZnO NPs enhanced the contents of carotenoids, chlorophyll a and b, and total chlorophyll under salt stress conditions [20, 21]. When salt-stressed citrus plants (Citrus reticulata) were treated with ZnO NPs, it results in decreased accumulation of total soluble sugars and proline contents that help in the osmoregulation of plants and maintain the growth rate of treated plants [22].

2.2 Iron nanoparticles (Fe2O3 NPs)

Iron oxide nanoparticles are a rich source of Fe for plants. When peppermint was exposed to Fe2O3 NPs, proline content, and lipid peroxidation were decreased significantly in saline soil. Antioxidant enzyme activities (guaiacol peroxidase, CAT, and SOD) declined in plants. They also increased the potassium, zinc, calcium, iron, leaf dry and fresh weight, and phosphorus [23]. Grape softwood showed a prominent increase in protein content and reduced production of hydrogen peroxide, proline, and antioxidant enzyme activities when treated with potassium silicate and Fe2O3 NPs [24]. Under salt stress, the application of Fe2O3 NPs on Helianthus annuus increased the activities of POD and CAT [25]. Ajowan (Trachyspermum ammi) was treated with Fe2O3 NPs under saline conditions increased antioxidant activities, osmolyte synthesis, and maintained Na+/ K+ ratio. These adaptations help plants to improve leaf pigments, seed yield, membrane stability, and shoot and root growth [9].

2.3 Silicon nanoparticles (SiO2 NPs)

SiO2 NPs are used to help plants by forming a layer in cell walls and maintaining yield. In squash and tomato plants, the antioxidant system is enhanced and seed germination increases due to SiO2 NPs under salt stress [26]. In Basil plants, silica nanoparticles have shown promising results related to morphological and physiological traits under salt stress [27]. SiO2 NPs increased the seedling growth of lentils and seed germination and improved the defense mechanism of plants in saline conditions [28]. They help plants to cope up with salt stress by increasing the fresh weight in maize [29]. Under salt stress, the application of SiO2 NPs on soybean decreased toxic ROS production and Na + level in leaves [30]. Wheat cultivars treated with SiO2 NPs improved biological antioxidant levels and seedling growth under salt stress [31]. Application of SiO2 NPs on the strawberry plant in saline conditions increased the photosynthetic pigment and maintained the carotenoid and chlorophyll content, decreasing the effect on epicuticular wax [32].

2.4 Cerium nanoparticles (CeO2 NPs)

They can be used as fertilizer to stimulate the growth of roots, enhance the antioxidant enzyme activities, and to prevent membrane leakage and peroxidation [33]. Moreover, CeO2 NPs help to preserve cell wall and chloroplast structure [34]. Activation of CeO2 NPs as antioxidants depends upon the pH of surroundings, sub-cellular localization, surface charge, concentration, and particle size. CeO2 NPs increased the growth in Dracocephalum Moldavica (a herbaceous plant also called Moldavian balm), by regulating nonenzymatic and enzymatic defense mechanisms under saline conditions [35]. Brassica Napus plants treated with CeO2 NPs have efficient chloroplast and biomass under salt stress [36]. Anatomical changes, such as low accumulation of Na + in roots and high Na + flow toward shoots have also been reported [37].

2.5 Silver nanoparticles Ag NPs

Silver nanoparticles enhanced the sodium, potassium, and chloride to regulate the osmolality level in treated plants under salt stress conditions. The stability of Ag NPs can be easily controlled in aquatic environments as compared to soil conditions [38]. Priming of seeds was carried out with Ag NPs to enhance the seed germination in wheat and the development of tomato plants [39]. The combined effect of Ag NPs with NaCl reduced the thiobarbituric acid reactive substances, electrolyte leakage, and hydrogen peroxide to control the oxidative damage in plants that is linked with the overproduction of ROS [40]. Triticum aestivum treated with Ag NPs increased the fresh and dry biomass under saline conditions [41]. Seeds of Pennisetum glaucum treated with Ag NPs improved the growth, proline, and relative water content (RWC) and decreased the oxidative damage by increasing the antioxidant enzyme activities under saline conditions [42].

2.6 Titanium dioxide nanoparticles (TiO2 NPs)

Titanium is a transition element and the 9th most abundant element that contributes 0.33% of the earth’s outer layer [43]. It improves photosynthesis and chlorophyll pigments in plants by altering antioxidant enzyme activities [44]. Titanium has an integral role in plants’ tolerance under stressful conditions [45]. Dracocephalum moldavica plants were treated with TiO2 NPs improved plant growth, and proline content and increased enzymatic activities, soluble sugars, and amino acids under salinity stress [46].

2.7 Carbon nanoparticles (C NPs)

Carbon nanoparticles have distinctive properties, including morphologically small surface area and better chemical reactivity [47]. They help in increasing seed germination and crop production under salt stress [48]. Application of C NPs on Brassica napus increased the NaCl stress tolerance in the plant by reestablishing ion homeostasis and redox balance [49]. When Ocimum basilicum was treated with C NPs increased enzymatic and nonenzymatic defense systems, and increased carotenoid and chlorophyll content [50]. Proline content in roots and leaves, photosystem II activity, soluble sugar in leaves were increased, and membrane integrity was maintained due to an increase in unsaturated fatty acid in Sophora alopecuroides C NPs treated plants under salt stress [51]. Application of C NPs on Triticum aetivum plants under saline conditions enhanced phosphorus and potassium content in roots and phosphorus content in shoot and increased the activity of antioxidant enzymes and improved the chlorophyll content, free ascorbic acid, amino acid, and soluble sugars [52]. Table 1 consists of the reports of different scientists who studied the effects of the treatment of different nanoparticles on different plant species and their responses to physiological levels under salt stress.

Type of NPsPlant speciesPhysiological responses of plants under salt stressReferences
Zinc NPs (ZNO NPs)Luminus termisEnhanced photosynthetic pigments, antioxidant responses, and growth.[16]
Zea maysIncreased antioxidant enzymes and improved salinity tolerance.[17]
Abelmoschus esculentusIncreased the activities of CAT and SOD and photosynthetic pigments and decreased the accumulation of soluble sugar and proline content.[18]
Brassica napusIonic regulation, osmolyte synthesis, and upregulated oxidative defense system.[19]
Gossypium hirsutumEnhanced content of carotenoids and chlorophyll a & b.[20]
Citrus reticulataDecreased accumulation of total soluble sugars and proline contents, osmoprotectants.[22]
Iron NPs (Fe2O3 NPs)Mentha piperitaDecreasing lipid peroxidation and increase in leaf dry and fresh weight, potassium, calcium, iron, phosphorus, and zinc contents.[23]
Grape softwoodIncreased protein content and reduced production of hydrogen peroxide, proline, and antioxidant enzymes.[24]
Helianthus annuusIncreased antioxidant activities.[25]
Trachyspermum ammiImproved osmolyte synthesis, antioxidant activities, and improved Na+/ K+ ratio.[9]
Silicon NPs (SiO2 NPs)Tomato and squashIncreased ROS and seed germination. Maintained vitamin C concentration and chlorophyll content.[26]
Ocimum basilicumIncreasing proline accumulation, antioxidant responses, leaf dry and fresh weight, and chlorophyll content.[27]
Zea maysBoosting defense mechanism by ROS.[29]
Glycine maxDecreased ROS, lipid peroxidation, and Na+, increased antioxidant activities and K+ content.[30]
Triticum aestivumImproved chlorophyll content and seed germination.[31]
Fragaria ananassaMaintained carotenoid and chlorophyll content, and decreased the effect on epicuticular wax.[32]
ChitosanZea maysIncreasing chlorophyll content, growth, photosystem II, and enhanced nitric oxide bioactivity.[53]
Cerium NPs (CeO2 NPs)Glycine maxRubisco carboxylase activity stimulates growth and increased photosynthesis.[33]
Dracocephalum MoldavicaIncreased enzymatic and nonenzymatic defense system.[35]
Brassica napusEfficient chloroplast and increase in biomass.[36]
Silver NPs (Ag NPs)Solanum lycopersicumIncreased germination with seed priming.[39]
Triticum aestivumEnhanced dry and fresh biomass of plants. Increased the activity of CAT and decreased the activity of POD, and increased the accumulation of soluble sugar and proline content.[41]
Pennisetum glaucumImproved proline and RWC, decreased oxidative damage by increasing the antioxidant enzyme activities.[42]
Titanium dioxide NPs (TiO2NPs)Dracocephalum moldavicaIncreased seedling growth, dry and fresh weight, root and shoot length. Increased antioxidant activity.[46]
Carbon NPs (C NPs)Brassica napusReestablishing ion homeostasis and redox balance.[49]
Ocimum basilicumIncreased enzymatic and nonenzymatic defense system, increased carotenoid, and chlorophyll content.[50]
Sophora alopecuroidesIncreased proline content in roots and leaves, photosystem II activity, soluble sugar in leaves, and membrane integrity was maintained.[51]
Triticum aetivumEnhanced phosphorus and potassium contents in root and phosphorus content in the shoot. Increased activity of antioxidant enzymes. Improved chlorophyll content, free ascorbic acid, amino acid, and soluble sugars.[52]

Table 1.

Effect of nanoparticles on plants under salinity stress.

Advertisement

3. Role of NPS in drought tolerance

Water crisis is one of the several issues that have been afflicted by climate change and global warming. Water is crucial for plant vitality as it has a role in the transportation of nutrients. Therefore, water deficit results in drought stress, which harshly affects the survival of plants and reduces agricultural production [54]. Therefore, a key solution in relation to sustainable agriculture is the identification of resistant crop varieties or improving drought tolerance in plants. Crop management and coping with various environmental challenges are possible by the new features of nanotechnology. The negative impacts of a restricted water supply on agriculture have been attempted to be reduced utilizing nano-materials. Farmers may be able to identify the effects of stress on plants at an early stage by using nano-sensors in global positioning systems that produce satellite photographs of fields [55]. Crop production in drought-prone locations may rise if soils have been given better water-retention capabilities [56]. Using nanoparticle-based plant modifications, conventional technologies may be used to improve crop plants by increasing the capacity of food crops to retain water, and nanoparticles improve the effectiveness of water consumption in the plants [57].

3.1 Silicon nanoparticles (SNPs)

Only a few studies have documented the biological activity of silica, an element that makes up a major portion of the Earth’s crust and is found as silicon [58]. The tolerance of Hawthorn (Crataegus sp.) plants to drought stress is increased by applying various concentrations of silica nanoparticles [59]. The findings indicated that pretreating SNPs had a favorable impact on the photosynthetic metrics, RWC, malondialdehyde, membrane electrolyte leakage, as well as the levels of carbohydrate and proline. Two Sorghum bicolor cultivars treated with silicon demonstrated enhanced drought tolerance by reducing their shoot-to-root ratio, which may have indicated enhanced root development and retention of photosynthetic rate. This suggests that increasing plant water uptake efficiency will increase resistance to drought [60]. Using sodium silicate at 1.0 mM enabled the reduction of the effects of drought stress on wheat [61]. Although the precise process is unknown but silicon helps stressed plants to boost shoot growth, preserve RWC, and chlorophyll content, and reduce the membrane lipid peroxidation.

3.2 Zinc nanoparticles (ZnO NPs)

Application of Zn plays a role in increasing the radical growth and seed viability along with the establishment of germinated seeds, especially in Zinc deficient areas. Soybean seeds subjected to water stress showed that nano-zinc oxide has improved seed germination [62]. A composite of ZnO, B2O3, and CuO NPs reduced the effects of drought stress on soybean [63] and increased grain production and shoot growth by 36 and 33%, respectively, and improved nitrate and phosphorus uptake. By boosting the activity of the antioxidant enzymes SOD and CAT in wheat, ZnO NPs improved drought resistance. Zn and Cu NPs also increased the antioxidative enzyme activity, decreased lipid peroxidation, stabilized the photosynthetic pigments with increased RWC, and enhanced drought tolerance in wheat [64]. CuO and ZnO NPs modified the root morphology of plants colonized by Triticum aestivum, a beneficial pseudomonad, altering the plants to withstand drought [65]. CuO NPs boosted the production of lateral roots in wheat seedlings, and ZnO NPs stimulated the growth of extended root hairs proximal to the root tip. Drought stress severely affected eggplant development and production [66]. Exogenous ZnO NPs with 50 and 100 ppm, boosted the RWC and membrane stability index, improved stem and leaf morphology and better photosynthesis in water-stressed eggplant and yield rose by 12.2 and 22.6%, respectively.

3.3 Iron nanoparticles (Fe2O3 NPs)

Iron is a key micronutrient that is essential for plant growth and development and its reduction causes chlorosis in plants [67]. Thus, iron absorption in plants experiencing drought stress may play a crucial role in their ability to withstand drought [68]. Fe2O3 NPs applied topically to Carthamus tinctorius leaves, reduced the negative effects of drought stress while simultaneously promoting yield, growth, and development metrics [69]. Plants under drought stress have a substantial impact of Fe2O3 NPs on the number and weight of seeds, number of bolls yield, and oil percentage in cotton. Drought stress in sunflower was significantly reduced by the application of maghemite nanoparticles (a member of iron oxide) [70]. The activity of zerovalent (nZVI) iron nanoparticles is hypothesized to activate the proton pump ATPase (H+ -ATPase) of the plasma membrane in leaves of Arabidopsis thaliana plants, which in turn contributes to their ability to withstand drought by increasing the stomatal aperture [71]. They retained the drought sensitivity and boosted CO2 uptake, the rate of the stomatal opening was accelerated, which in turn increased the plant biomass and chlorophyll content [72].

3.4 Titanium nanoparticles (titanium dioxide TiO2 & anatase titanium dioxide AnTiO2)

Wheat seed gluten and starch contents have responded favorably for using TiO2 NPs foliar applications and improved plant height, seed and ear numbers, ear weight, gluten and starch content, yield, biomass, and harvest index under drought stress [73]. Enhanced photosynthesis and increased the maize plant’s capacity to absorb light under water deficit [74]. Applying nanoparticles and Gibberellic acid to basil plants effectively enhanced the rate of photosynthesis, enhancing their tolerance to drought stress [75]. Various doses and sizes (10–25 nm) of AnTiO2NP on the flax plant under water-scarce conditions responded favorably for growth, development, hydrogen peroxide (H2O2), malondialdehyde content, seed oil production, protein content, and photosynthetic pigments [76]. The effects of TiO2 NP on onion seedlings have also been documented as they boosted SOD activity. TiO2 NP concentrations of 40 and 50 mg/ml, lowered the CAT and POD activities and secretion of amylase was reduced. However, seed germination and seedling growth were reduced at higher concentration of TiO2 NPs, whereas the effect was enhanced at lower concentration [77].

3.5 Silver nanoparticles (Ag NPs)

Developing drought-tolerant cultivars and reducing drought stress is essential for maintaining food security [78]. Only a small amount of historical literature focused on the interaction between drought and Ag NPs. Diminishing the detrimental impacts of drought stress on Lens culinaris has been credited to the application of Ag NPs [68]. The study indicated that varying PEG and Ag NPs concentrations had a significant impact on seed germination, root length, and biomass. Hence, Ag NPs could help to reduce water stress that affects plant development and productivity [79].

3.6 Cerium oxide nanoparticles (CeO2 NPs)

Cerium oxide NPs could help Sorghum bicolor to cope with drought stress by inducing oxidative stress by catalytically neutralizing ROS and maintaining the photosynthetic activity and grain yield [80]. The foliar spray of nanoceria dramatically decreased free radicals (H2O2 and superoxide) under drought conditions, for instance, by 36 and 41%, respectively. ROS-scavenging enzymes were shown to be more active in plants exposed to drought: POD (54%), SOD (94%), and CAT (117%). The rate of pollen germination, carbon absorption, and seed output per plant was improved by 38, 31, and 31%, respectively. Different reports summarizing the effects of a number of nanoparticles on different plant species and their physiological responses under drought stress are discussed in Table 2.

Type of NPsPlant speciesPhysiological responses of plants under drought stressReferences
Silicon NPs (SiO2NPs)Crataegus sp.Positive effects on photosynthesis, malondialdehyde, RWC, membrane electrolyte leakage, chlorophyll, carotenoid, carbohydrate, and proline content.[59]
Sorghum bicolorReduced shoot-to-root ratio, improved root growth and the maintenance of photosynthetic rate, augmentation of water uptake efficiency, increase in leaf area index and leaf weight.[40]
Triticum aestivumImproved shoot growth, increased the leaf chlorophyll content, maintained leaf water potential in stressed plants, reduced membrane lipid peroxidation.[61]
Zinc NPs (ZnO NPs)Glycine maxIncreased germination, radical growth and seed viability, shoot growth and grain yield, and uptake of N and P.[62, 63]
Triticum aestivumIncreased antioxidant enzymes, reduced lipid peroxidation, stabilized the photosynthetic pigments, proliferation of elongated root hairs, and increased water stress tolerant gene expression.[64]
Solanum melongenaIncreased RWC and MSI, improved stem and leaf anatomy, photosynthetic efficiency, growth, and yield.[66]
Iron NPs (Fe2O3 NPs)Carthamus tinctoriusImproved crop yield at the flowering stage and enhanced oil percentage.[69]
Arabidopsis thalianaEnhanced plasma membrane proton pump ATPase activity, plant biomass, chlorophyll content, and CO2 assimilation.[71, 72]
Titanium NPs (Titanium dioxide TiO2Triticum aestivumEnhancement in seed gluten and starch contents, plant height, seed number, and biomass.[73]
Zea maysImproved sunlight absorbance, synthesis of photosynthetic pigments, and photosynthesis.[74]
Ocimum basilicumIncreased plant drought resistance and improve photosynthetic mechanism.[75]
Linum usitatissimumIncreased chlorophyll and carotenoids, enhancing flax development and yield, declining malondialdehyde and H2O2 content.[76]
Allium cepaIncreased SOD activity, seed germination, and seedling growth.[77]
Silver NPs (Ag NPs)Lens culinarisIncreased germination rate, root length, root fresh, and dry weight.[68]
Cerium Oxide NPs (CeO2 NPs)Sorghum bicolorEnhanced catalytic scavenging of ROS, reduced O2− (41%), H2O2 (36%), increased yield, pollen germination, and CO2 absorption.[80]

Table 2.

Effects of nanoparticles on plants under drought stress.

Advertisement

4. Nanoparticles and other environmental stresses

Titanium oxide nanoparticles play a substantial role in the mitigation of light stress in crops as they catalyze the oxidation-reduction reaction, which then forms superoxide anion radicals and hydroxides. Oxidative stress is induced by ultraviolet (UV) light and has a negative impression on the growth of the plant. UV-B produces H2O2 and superoxide radicals and enhanced the leakage of electrolytes and lipid peroxidation, which leads to reduce the photosynthesis rate and normal leaf structure is also deteriorated [81]. In wheat plants, Silicon NPs increase antioxidant activities for the regulation of oxidative stress after UV-B exposure [82]. Herbicides are used to control weeds in agroecosystems. A methyl viologen herbicide, Paraquat is used extensively to control weeds in rice. Multiwall carbon nanotubes can modulate the toxicity of Paraquat [50], which promotes lateral root growth and photosynthesis in Arabidopsis and protect against the toxicity of Paraquat by lowering its bioavailability and promoting the oxidative-stress-related protein expression and photosynthesis. Therefore, the NPs can modulate abiotic stress-induced responses in plant growth at different levels. However, their physiochemical, electrical, optical, and biological properties are crucial [83]. Plants’ tolerance to low temperature in green beans is increased by the exogenous application of Ag NPs [84] as they are used to reduce the oxidative stress in wheat.

Advertisement

5. Effect of nanoparticles on antioxidant and molecular mechanism of plants

Nanoparticles have an impact on plants’ antioxidant system at the molecular level as they increase the capability of plants to tolerate oxidative stress. When Brassica juncea plant was treated with silver NPs, antioxidant enzyme activities (CAT, ascorbate peroxidase APX and guaiacol peroxidase) were increased which reduced the ROS [78]. The antioxidant system of Spirodela polyrhiza plants was activated when copper NPs were used to induce the activity of CAT, POD, and SOD. Moreover, ROS level also increased remarkably because of malondialdehyde and glutathione [85]. When seedlings of Brassica juncea were treated with gold NPs, the activity of antioxidant enzymes (guaiacol peroxidase, CAT, glutathione reductase, and APX) was significantly increased, in addition to the accumulation of the higher amount of proline and hydrogen peroxide. The activity of glutathione reductase was maximum at 200 ppm and the activity of other antioxidant enzymes, such as APX and guaiacol peroxidase, were also increased at 400 ppm of gold NPs treated plants [86]. When roots of kidney beans were exposed to CeO2 NPs for a longer time, then antioxidant enzymes’ activities were reduced and soluble protein was increased. While leaves treated with CeO2 NPs showed increased activity of guaiacol peroxidase [87]. Plants exposed to ZnO NPs increase the Zn and SOD antioxidant enzyme minimizing the effect of oxidative stress [88].

The molecular mechanism of plants can be studied by using the model plant species. Arabidopsis thaliana treated with AgNPs gene expression analysis done by RT-PCR and cDNA microarray analyzed for transcriptome behavior [89] showed 281 upregulated genes associated with metal and oxidative stress and 80 downregulated genes associated with hormonal stimuli and plant defense system. The effect of AgNPs on rice has also been studied and some responsive proteins were associated with transcription, oxidative stress, protein degradation, cell division, calcium signaling and regulation, and apoptosis [90]. Hence, the effect of different nanoparticles on different plant species for the functioning of ROS and antioxidant enzymes has been briefed in Table 3.

Type of nanoparticlesPlant speciesImpact on antioxidant system and ROSReferences
Zinc NPs (ZnO NPs)Solanum lycopersicumDecreased malondialdehyde content and increased SOD, CAT, POD, and APX activities under salinity stress.[91]
Silver NPs (Ag NPs)Pennisetum glaucumSignificant increase in proline content, antioxidant enzyme activities, flavonoid contents, and phenolics.[42]
Titanium NPs (Titanium dioxide TiO2Spinacia oleraceaEnhance antioxidant stress tolerance.[92]
Glycine maxEnhance antioxidant enzyme activities contribute to reduction in hydrogen peroxide and malondialdehyde content under salinity.[45]
Silicon NPs (SiO2NPs)Coriandrum sativumReduce the detrimental impact of Pb under lead stress by altering vitamin C, antioxidant enzyme activation, and flavonoids and increase plant capabilities to endure abiotic stresses.[93]
Cerium oxide NPs (CeO2 NPs)Phaseolus vulgarisScavenge ROS in isolated chloroplasts protect plant photosynthesis from detrimental effects Of ROS accumulation during abiotic stresses.[87]

Table 3.

Effect of nanoparticles on plants for ROS and antioxidant system.

Advertisement

6. Mechanism of nanoparticle (NPs) absorption in plants

Absorption and translocation of NPs in plants are one of the latest disciplines of study. The most commonly used NPs to enhance abiotic stress tolerance in plants are metal-based (MB) and carbon-based (CB). Among MB, the most widely studied nanomaterials are metal and metal oxides, such as copper, silver, titanium, iron, and zinc; while the most explored CB nanomaterials are carbon nanotubes (CNTs), fullerene (C70), and fullerol (C60(OH)20) [94]. The impact of NPs on plants is determined by a number of variables, including availability, uptake, translocation, and accumulation. The plant cell wall restricts the entry of foreign elements; therefore, effective techniques are needed to introduce advantageous NPs and make them available to plants.

Different factors like size, chemical content, and plant species affect the entry of NPs, which is further influenced by their stability, transport and absorption, toxicity, and accumulation [95]. Particle size, surface charge, and the hydrophobicity of the plant surface all play important roles in their absorption [96]. Additionally, the absorption rate and translocation in plants are directly correlated to the structure of the nanomaterial utilized [97]. All of these elements highlight the requirement for developing and enhancing laboratory techniques to comprehend the NPs physicochemical qualities [98] as they undergo biotransformation in the soil, which has a direct impact on their toxicity and bioavailability. Foliar spraying or incubating isolated cells, roots, pollen, seeds, and protoplast with NPs, direct injection, irrigation of plants with NPs, delivery by biolistic, and hydroponic treatment have all been employed in previous research to make NPs available to the plant cells [99]. Bioaccumulation defines the uptake of NPs by plant roots and travels through apoplastic and symplastic routes to the cortex and pericycle [100].

Nanoparticles entered through the stomata, cuticle, stigma, trichomes, wounds, and lenticels and move through the phloem. They reach the xylem and phloem through the root tip meristem, where the Casparian strips continue to the shoot but have not fully developed. Endocytosis allows NPs to enter cells even when the cell wall, cell membrane, and Casparian strips block their uptake and transport. Additionally, transporters like aquaporins and carrier proteins facilitate their easier entry into cells [101]. The capacity of roots to absorb nutrients can change if NPs accumulate on the surface of the roots. Parenchymatic intercellular gaps in seeds enable NPs to be directly absorbed before being diffused into the cotyledon. Stomata allow for the internalization of NPs larger than 10 nm, which are then delivered to the plant’s vascular system via apoplastic and symplastic pathways. Once internalized, NPs move through vascular systems carried by phloem alongside sugar flow, move-in both the directions, and eventually build up in organs that could serve as sap-sinks [102]. The apoplastic pathway has been extensively described to enhance the transfer of water nutrients and nonessential metal complexes. Leaf shape and chemical composition of surface waxes limits the entry of NPs through leaf [103]. Hence, to ensure the NPs’ effective absorption in plants, it is crucial to consider their size, concentration, and physiological environment.

Advertisement

7. Mechanism of translocation and accumulation of NPs in plants

Mechanism of NPs translocation in different plant cells and organelles has been clarified [96]. Plant cell wall serves as a barrier that manages NPs uptake and establishes solubilization needed to enable their translocation. NPs with a size range of 40–50 nm can easily pass through the cell wall [104]. Composition of NPs affects their mobility through cell membrane or cell wall and also encourages their adsorption to radical exudates. Positively charged NPs have better adherence to cell walls. Their coating and morphology have a big impact on how they behave inside plants and the rhizosphere [105]. After penetration through cells, they go through the shoots [101] and roots are transmitted to various aerial tissues and the seeds [6]. Gold NPs were only collected in the shoots of Oryza sativa when used with Cucurbita pepo, Raphanus raphanistrum, and other plant species. Positively charged gold nanoparticles tend to be quickly absorbed by plant roots [106]. The entry of NPs into the cell is facilitated by capillary action and osmotic pressure [95]. Membrane proteins of NPs, including as receptors and transporters, are altered as a result of their interaction with the outermost layer.

Negatively charged gold nanoparticles are easily translocated from plant roots to shoots. The most stable are SiO2 and TiO2, as they remain present in plant tissues after their uptake. When Zea mays is exposed to ZnO NPs hydroponically, most of them are accumulated in its roots and shoots. It is explained by the maximal NPs dissolution in the rhizosphere, which produces the zinc ions and enhances its absorption and translocation in the plant [107]. Soil-grown wheat has also been observed for this perseverance.

Different processes have been identified by the translocation of CeO2 and ZnO NPs into Glycine max [108]. CuO NPs have been shown to be capable of moving from Zea mays roots to shoots and vice versa. TiO2 NPs with a diameter of 140 nm or larger may translocate in Triticum aestivum roots [103]. The data of different reports about accumulation of different NPs in different plant tissues have been summarized in Table 4.

Type of nanoparticlesPlant speciesConc (mg/l *mg/kg)Accumulation (mg/kg)References
RootsShoots
Copper NPsOryza sativa10001544.117.27[109]
Lactuca sativa2503773—[110]
Vigna radiate125—18.46[111]
Brassica juncea1500190.4—[112]
Cajanus cajan205.8219.06[113]
Phaseolus vulgaris100800—[114]
Silver NPsGlycin max4000210211.35[108]
Oryza sativa1000205[115]
Solanum lycopersicum250—50[116]
Zinc NPsSolanum lycopersicum1000—250[117]
Zea mays1001030[107]
Titanium NPsSolanum lycopersicum1000—250[117]
Magnesium NPsZea mays1000103131[118]

Table 4.

Accumulation of nanoparticles in different plant species’ tissues.

Advertisement

8. Conclusion and prospective

Various abiotic factors are damaging the plants in terms of growth and development leading to a reduction in yield and deteriorating the quality. Applications of NPs have been proven very protective as they stimulate germination, growth, and improve yield. They increase tolerance in plants as they enhance the uptake of water and nutrients. They are capable to metabolize starch reserves in plant cells. They stimulate the process of photosynthesis and alter levels of phytochromes and modulate oxidative stress.

Although various studies suggest the beneficial roles of NPs in plants but the molecular basis of the actual mechanism is still unknown. Further elucidation on this mechanism may generate the smart NPs for the production of crops sustainable to the environment. In addition, their interaction with signaling molecules is also required to be explored. The economic stability of the use of NPs in agriculture is important as silver and gold nanoparticles costs very expensive. Understanding their mode of action, toxicity limits, signaling, and translocation; hence cheaper NPs may be used as an alternative.

Advertisement

Conflict of interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. 1. Zhao L, Cui J, Cai Y, Yang S, Liu J, Wang W, et al. Comparative transcriptome analysis of two contrasting soybean varieties in response to aluminum toxicity. International Journal of Molecular Sciences. 2020;21(12):4316. DOI: 10.3390/ijms21124316
  2. 2. Das S, Ho A, Kim PJ. Role of microbes in climate smart agriculture. Frontiers in Microbiology. 2019;26(10):2756. DOI: 10.3389/fmicb.2019.02756
  3. 3. Bhatt D, Nath M, Sharma M, Bhatt MD, Bisht DS, Butani NV. Role of growth regulators and phytohormones in overcoming environmental stress. In: Roychoudaury A, Tripathi Dk, editors. Protective Chemical Agents in the Amelioration of Plant Abiotic Stress: Biochemical and Molecular Perspectives. 1st ed. Chichester: Wiley; 2020. p. 254-279. DOI: 10.1002/9781119552154.ch11
  4. 4. Khan Z, Upadhyaya H. Impact of nanoparticles on abiotic stress responses in plants: An overview. In: Tripathi DK, Ahmad P, Sharma S, Chauhan DK, Dubey NK, editors. Nanomaterials in Plants, Algae and Microorganisms. 1st ed. Academic Press; 2019;2:305-322. DOI: 10.1016/B978-0-12-811488-9.00015-9
  5. 5. Anastasiadis F, Manikas I, Apostolidou I, Wahbeh S. The role of traceability in end-to-end circular Agri-food supply chains. Industrial Marketing Management. 2022;104:196-211. DOI: 10.1016/j.indmarman.2022.04.021
  6. 6. Tripathi DK, Singh S, Singh VP, Prasad SM, Dubey NK, Chauhan DK. Silicon nanoparticles more effectively alleviated UV-B stress than silicon in wheat (Triticum aestivum) seedlings. Plant Physiology and Biochemistry. 2017;110:70-81. DOI: 10.1016/j.plaphy.2016.06.026
  7. 7. Javed T, Shabbir R, Hussain S, Naseer MA, Ejaz I, Ali MM, et al. Nanotechnology for endorsing abiotic stresses: A review on the role of nanoparticles and nanocompositions. Functional Plant Biology. 2022. DOI: 10.1071/FP22092
  8. 8. Kandhol N, Jain M, Tripathi DK. Nanoparticles as potential hallmarks of drought stress tolerance in plants. Physiologia Plantarum. 2022;174(2):e13665. DOI: 10.1111/ppl.13665
  9. 9. Abdoli S, Ghassemi-Golezani K, Alizadeh-Salteh S. Responses of ajowan (Trachyspermum ammi L.) to exogenous salicylic acid and iron oxide nanoparticles under salt stress. Environmental Science and Pollution Research. 2020;27(29):36939-36953. DOI: 10.1007/s11356-020-09453-1
  10. 10. Tayyab QM, Almas MH, Jilani G, Razzaq A. Nanoparticles and plant growth dynamics: A review. Journal of Applied Agriculture and Biotechnology. 2016;1(2):14-22
  11. 11. Lowry GV, Avellan A, Gilbertson LM. Opportunities and challenges for nanotechnology in the Agri-tech revolution. Nature Nanotechnology. 2019;14(6):517-522. DOI: 10.1038/s41565-019-0461-7
  12. 12. Fincheira P, Tortella G, Duran N, Seabra AB, Rubilar O. Current applications of nanotechnology to develop plant growth inducer agents as an innovation strategy. Critical Reviews in Biotechnology. 2020;40(1):15-30. DOI: 10.1080/07388551.2019.1681931
  13. 13. Shrivastava P, Kumar R. Soil salinity: A serious environmental issue and plant growth promoting bacteria as one of the tools for its alleviation. Saudi Journal of Biological Sciences. 2015;22(2):123-131. DOI: 10.1016/j.sjbs.2014.12.001
  14. 14. Negrão S, Schmöckel S, Tester M. Evaluating physiological responses of plants to salinity stress. Annals of Botany. 2017;119(1):1-11. DOI: 10.1093/aob/mcw191
  15. 15. Silveira JA, Carvalho FE. Proteomics, photosynthesis and salt resistance in crops: An integrative view. Journal of Proteomics. 2016;143:24-35. DOI: 10.1016/j.jprot.2016.03.013
  16. 16. Latef AAHA, Alhmad MFA, Abdelfattah KE. The possible roles of priming with ZnO nanoparticles in mitigation of salinity stress in lupine (Lupinus termis) plants. Journal of Plant Growth Regulation. 2017;36(1):60-70. DOI: 10.1007/s00344-016-9618
  17. 17. Rizwan M, Ali S, ur Rehman MZ, Adrees M, Arshad M, Qayyum MF, et al. Alleviation of cadmium accumulation in maize (Zea mays L.) by foliar spray of zinc oxide nanoparticles and biochar to contaminated soil. Environmental Pollution. 2019;248:358-367. DOI: 10.1016/j.envpol.2019.02.031
  18. 18. Alabdallah NM, Alzahrani HS. The potential mitigation effect of ZnO nanoparticles on [Abelmoschus esculentus L. Moench] metabolism under salt stress conditions. Saudi Journal of Biological Sciences. 2020;27(11):3132-3137. DOI: 10.1016/j.sjbs.2020.08.005
  19. 19. Farouk S, Al-Amri SM. Exogenous zinc forms counteract NaCl-induced damage by regulating the antioxidant system, osmotic adjustment substances, and ions in canola (Brassica napus L. cv. Pactol) plants. Journal of soil science and plant. Nutrition. 2019;19(4):887-899. DOI: 10.1007/s42729-019-00087
  20. 20. Acosta-Motos JR, Ortuño MF, Bernal-Vicente A, Diaz-Vivancos P, Sanchez-Blanco MJ, Hernandez JA. Plant responses to salt stress: Adaptive mechanisms. Agronomy. 2017;7(1):18. DOI: 10.3390/agronomy7010018
  21. 21. Venkatachalam P, Priyanka N, Manikandan K, Ganeshbabu I, Indiraarulselvi P, Geetha N, et al. Enhanced plant growth promoting role of phycomolecules coated zinc oxide nanoparticles with P supplementation in cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.). Plant Physiology and Biochemistry. 2017;110:118-127. DOI: 10.1016/j.plaphy.2016.09.004
  22. 22. Li J, Hu J, Xiao L, Gan Q , Wang Y. Physiological effects and fluorescence labeling of magnetic iron oxide nanoparticles on citrus (Citrus reticulata) seedlings. Water, Air, & Soil Pollution. 2017;228(1):52. DOI: 10.1007/s11270-016-3237-9
  23. 23. Askary M, Talebi SM, Amini F, Bangan ADB. Effects of iron nanoparticles on Mentha piperita L. under salinity stress. Biologija. 2017;63(1):65-75. DOI: 10.6001/biologija.v63i1.3476
  24. 24. Mozafari A-a, Ghaderi N. Grape response to salinity stress and role of iron nanoparticle and potassium silicate to mitigate salt induced damage under in vitro conditions. Physiology and Molecular Biology of Plants. 2018;24(1):25-35. DOI: 10.1007/s12298-017-0488
  25. 25. Torabian S, Farhangi-Abriz S, Zahedi M. Efficacy of FeSO4 nano formulations on osmolytes and antioxidative enzymes of sunflower under salt stress. Indian Journal of Plant Physiology. 2018;23(2):305-315. DOI: 10.1007/s40502-018-0366-8
  26. 26. Pinedo-Guerrero ZH, Cadenas-Pliego G, Ortega-Ortiz H, González-Morales S, Benavides-Mendoza A, Valdés-Reyna J, et al. Form of silica improves yi-ld, fruit quality and antioxidant defense system of tomato plants under salt stress. Agriculture. 2020;10(9):367. DOI: 10.3390/agriculture10090367
  27. 27. Siddiqui MH, Al-Whaibi MH, Firoz M, Al-Khaishany MY. Role of nanoparticles in plants. In: Siddiqui MH, Al-Whaibi MH, Firoz M, editors. Nanotechnology and Plant Sciences. 1st ed. Cham: Springer; 2015. p. 19-35. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-14502-0_2
  28. 28. Kalteh M, Alipour ZT, Ashraf S, Marashi Aliabadi M, Falah NA. Effect of silica nanoparticles on basil (Ocimum basilicum) under salinity stress. Journal of Chemical Health Risks. 2014;4(3):49-55. DOI: 10.22034/JCHR.2018.544075
  29. 29. Janmohammadi M, Sabaghnia N, Ahadnezhad A. Impact of silicon dioxide nanoparticles on seedling early growth of lentil (Lens culinaris Medik.) genotypes with various origins. Agriculture & Forestry. 2015;61(3):19-33. DOI: 10.17707/AgricultForest.61.3.02
  30. 30. Gao X, Zou C, Wang L, Zhang F. Silicon decreases transpiration rate and conductance from stomata of maize plants. Journal of Plant Nutrition. 2006;29(9):1637-1647. DOI: 10.1080/01904160600851494
  31. 31. Farhangi-Abriz S, Torabian S. Nano-silicon alters antioxidant activities of soybean seedlings under salt toxicity. Protoplasma. 2018;255(3):953-962. DOI: 10.1007/s00709-017-1202-0
  32. 32. Mushtaq A, Rizwan S, Jamil N, Ishtiaq T, Irfan S, Ismail T, et al. Influence of silicon sources and controlled release fertilizer on the growth of wheat cultivars of Balochistan under salt stress. Pakistan Journal of Botany. 2019;51(5):1561-1567. DOI: 10.30848/PJB2019-5(44)
  33. 33. Avestan S, Ghasemnezhad M, Esfahani M, Byrt CS. Application of nano-silicon dioxide improves salt stress tolerance in strawberry plants. Agronomy. 2019;9(5):246. DOI: 10.3390/agronomy9050246
  34. 34. Cao Z, Rossi L, Stowers C, Zhang W, Lombardini L, Ma X. The impact of cerium oxide nanoparticles on the physiology of soybean (Glycine max (L.) Merr.) under different soil moisture conditions. Environmental Science and Pollution Research. 2018;25(1):930-939. DOI: 10.1007/s11356-017-0501-5
  35. 35. Jurkow R, Sękara A, Pokluda R, Smoleń S, Kalisz A. Biochemical response of oakleaf lettuce seedlings to different concentrations of some metal (oid) oxide nanoparticles. Agronomy. 2020;10(7):997. DOI: 10.3390/agronomy10070997
  36. 36. Mohammadi MHZ, Panahirad S, Navai A, Bahrami MK, Kulak M, Gohari G. Cerium oxide nanoparticles (CeO2-NPs) improve growth parameters and antioxidant defense system in Moldavian balm (Dracocephalum moldavica L.) under salinity stress. Plant. Stress. 2021;1:100006. DOI: 10.1016/j.stress.2021.100006
  37. 37. Rossi L, Zhang W, Ma X. Cerium oxide nanoparticles alter the salt stress tolerance of Brassica napus L. by modifying the formation of root apoplastic barriers. Environmental Pollution. 2017;229:132-138. DOI: 10.1016/j.envpol.2017.05.083
  38. 38. Rossi L, Zhang W, Lombardini L, Ma X. The impact of cerium oxide nanoparticles on the salt stress responses of Brassica napus L. Environmental Pollution. 2016;219:28-36. DOI: 10.1016/j.envpol.2016.09.060
  39. 39. Banan A, Kalbassi MR, Bahmani M, Sotoudeh E, Johari SA, Ali JM, et al. Salinity modulates biochemical and histopathological changes caused by silver nanoparticles in juvenile Persian sturgeon (Acipenser persicus). Environmental Science and Pollution Research. 2020;27:10658-10671. DOI: 10.1007/s11356-020-07687-7
  40. 40. Almutairi ZM. Influence of silver nano-particles on the salt resistance of tomato (Solanum lycopersicum) during germination. International Journal of Agriculture and Biology. 2016;18(2):449-457. DOI: 10.17957/IJAB/15.0114
  41. 41. Wahid I, Kumari S, Ahmad R, Hussain SJ, Alamri S, Siddiqui MH, et al. Silver nanoparticle regulates salt tolerance in wheat through changes in ABA concentration, ion homeostasis, and defense systems. Biomolecules. 2020;10(11):1506. DOI: 10.3390/biom10111506
  42. 42. Khan I, Raza MA, Awan SA, Shah GA, Rizwan M, Ali B, et al. Amelioration of salt induced toxicity in pearl millet by seed priming with silver nanoparticles (AgNPs): The oxidative damage, antioxidant enzymes and ions uptake are major determinants of salt tolerant capacity. Plant Physiology and Biochemistry. 2020;156:221-232. DOI: 10.1016/j.plaphy.2020.09.018
  43. 43. Buettner KM, Valentine AM. Bioinorganic chemistry of titanium. Chemical Reviews. 2012;112(3):1863-1881. DOI: 10.1021/cr1002886
  44. 44. Carbajal-Vazquez VH, Gomez-Merino FC, Herrera-Corredor JA, Contreras-Oliva A, Alcantar-Gonzalez G, Trejo-TéLlez LI. Effect of titanium foliar applications on tomato fruits from plants grown under salt stress conditions. Notulae Botanicae Horti Agrobotanici Cluj-Napoca. 2020;48(2):924-937. DOI: 10.15835/nbha48211904
  45. 45. Abdel Latef AAH, Srivastava AK, El-sadek MSA, Kordrostami M, Tran LSP. Titanium dioxide nanoparticles improve growth and enhance tolerance of broad bean plants under saline soil conditions. Land Degradation & Development. 2018;29(4):1065-1073. DOI: 10.1002/ldr.2780
  46. 46. Gohari G, Mohammadi A, Akbari A, Panahirad S, Dadpour MR, Fotopoulos V, et al. Titanium dioxide nanoparticles (TiO 2 NPs) promote growth and ameliorate salinity stress effects on essential oil profile and biochemical attributes of Dracocephalum moldavica. Scientific Reports. 2020;10(1):1-14. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-020-57794-1
  47. 47. Verma SK, Das AK, Gantait S, Kumar V, Gurel E. Applications of carbon nanomaterials in the plant system: A perspective view on the pros and cons. Science of the Total Environment. 2019;667:485-499. DOI: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019.02.409
  48. 48. Baz H, Creech M, Chen J, Gong H, Bradford K, Huo H. Water-soluble carbon nanoparticles improve seed germination and post-germination growth of lettuce under salinity stress. Agronomy. 2020;10(8):1192. DOI: 10.3390/agronomy10081192
  49. 49. Zhao G, Zhao Y, Lou W, Su J, Wei S, Yang X, et al. Nitrate reductase-dependent nitric oxide is crucial for multi-walled carbon nanotube-induced plant tolerance against salinity. Nanoscale. 2019;11(21):10511-10523. DOI: 10.1039/C8NR10514F
  50. 50. Gohari G, Safai F, Panahirad S, Akbari A, Rasouli F, Dadpour MR, et al. Modified multiwall carbon nanotubes display either phytotoxic or growth promoting and stress protecting activity in Ocimum basilicum L. in a concentration-dependent manner. Chemosphere. 2020;249:126171. DOI: 10.1016/j.chemosphere.2020.126171
  51. 51. Wan J, Wang R, Bai H, Wang Y, Xu J. Comparative physiological and metabolomics analysis reveals that single-walled carbon nanohorns and ZnO nanoparticles affect salt tolerance in Sophora alopecuroides. Environmental Science: Nano. 2020;7(10):2968-2981. DOI: 10.1039/D0EN00582G
  52. 52. Shafiq F, Iqbal M, Ali M, Ashraf MA. Seed pre-treatment with polyhydroxy fullerene nanoparticles confer salt tolerance in wheat through upregulation of H2O2 neutralizing enzymes and phosphorus uptake. Journal of Soil Science and Plant Nutrition. 2019;19(4):734-742. DOI: 10.1007/s42729-019-00073-4
  53. 53. Oliveira HC, Gomes BC, Pelegrino MT, Seabra AB. Nitric oxide-releasing chitosan nanoparticles alleviate the effects of salt stress in maize plants. Nitric Oxide. 2016;61:10-19. DOI: 10.1016/j.niox.2016.09.010
  54. 54. Mujumdar N. Coping with water scarcity: An action framework for agriculture and food security/improving water use efficiency: New directions for water Management in India/Indian journal of agricultural economics. Indian Journal of Agricultural Economics. 2013;68(4):603
  55. 55. Khot LR, Sankaran S, Maja JM, Ehsani R, Schuster EW. Applications of nanomaterials in agricultural production and crop protection: A review. Crop Protection. 2012;35:64-70. DOI: 10.1016/j.cropro.2012.01.007
  56. 56. Gururaj SB, Krishna B. Water retention capacity of biochar blended soils. Journal of Chemical and Pharmaceutical Sciences. 2016;9(3):1438-1441
  57. 57. Amjad S, Tiwari S, Serajuddin M. Applications of Nanobiotechnology in overcoming drought stress in crops. In: Nanobiotechnology. Switzerland: Springer; 2021. pp. 399-415. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-030-73606-4_17
  58. 58. Sheng H, Chen S. Plant silicon-cell wall complexes: Identification, model of covalent bond formation and biofunction. Plant Physiology and Biochemistry. 2020;155:13-19. DOI: 10.1016/j.plaphy.2020.07.020
  59. 59. Ashkavand P, Tabari M, Zarafshar M, Tomásková I, Struve D. Effect of SiO2 nanoparticles on drought resistance in hawthorn seedlings. Forest Research Papers/Leśne Prace Badawcze. 2015;76(4):350-359. DOI: 10.1515/frp-2015-0034
  60. 60. Hattori T, Inanaga S, Araki H, An P, Morita S, Luxová M, et al. Application of silicon enhanced drought tolerance in Sorghum bicolor. Physiologia Plantarum. 2005;123(4):459-466. DOI: 10.1111/j.1399-3054.2005.00481.x
  61. 61. Pei Z, Ming D, Liu D, Wan G, Geng X, Gong H, et al. Silicon improves the tolerance to water-deficit stress induced by polyethylene glycol in wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) seedlings. Journal of Plant Growth Regulation. 2010;29(1):106-115. DOI: 10.1007/s00344-009-9120-9
  62. 62. Sedghi M, Hadi M, Toluie SG. Effect of nano zinc oxide on the germination parameters of soybean seeds under drought stress. Annales of West University of Timisoara Series of Biology. 2013;16(2):73
  63. 63. Dimkpa C, Bindraban P, Fugice J, Agyin-Birikorang S, Singh U, Hellums D. Composite micronutrient nanoparticles and salts decrease drought stress in soybean. Agronomy for Sustainable Development. 2017;37:1-13. DOI: 10.1007/s13593-016-0412-8
  64. 64. Taran N, Storozhenko V, Svietlova N, Batsmanova L, Shvartau V, Kovalenko M. Effect of zinc and copper nanoparticles on drought resistance of wheat seedlings. Nanoscale Research Letters. 2017;12(1):1-6. DOI: 10.1186/s11671-017-1839-9
  65. 65. Yang K-Y, Doxey S, McLean JE, Britt D, Watson A, Al Qassy D, et al. Remodeling of root morphology by CuO and ZnO nanoparticles: Effects on drought tolerance for plants colonized by a beneficial pseudomonad. Botany. 2018;96(3):175-186. DOI: 10.1139/cjb-2017-0124
  66. 66. Semida WM, Abdelkhalik A, Mohamed GF, Abd El-Mageed TA, Abd El-Mageed SA, Rady MM, et al. Foliar application of zinc oxide nanoparticles promotes drought stress tolerance in eggplant (Solanum melongena L.). Plants. 2021;10(2):421. DOI: 10.3390/plants10020421
  67. 67. Sher A, Naveed K, Khan A. Grain zinc and iron enrichment through foliar application augments wheat yield under varying nitrogen regimes. Pakistan Journal of Botany. 2019;52(1):85-94. DOI: 10.30848/PJB2020-1(25)
  68. 68. Saxena R, Tomar RS, Kumar M. Exploring nanobiotechnology to mitigate abiotic stress in crop plants. Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences and Research. 2016;8(9):974
  69. 69. Davar ZF, Roozbahani A, Hosnamidi A. Evaluation the effect of water stress and foliar application of Fe nanoparticles on yield, yield components and oil percentage of safflower (Carthamus tinctorious L). International Journal of Advanced Biological and Biomedical Research. 2014;2(4):1150-1159
  70. 70. Martínez-Fernández D, Vítková M, Bernal MP, Komárek M. Effects of nano-maghemite on trace element accumulation and drought response of Helianthus annuus L. in a contaminated mine soil. Water, Air, & Soil Pollution. 2015;226(4):1-9. DOI: 10.1007/s11270-015-2365-y
  71. 71. Yoon H, Kang Y-G, Chang Y-S, Kim J-H. Effects of zerovalent iron nanoparticles on photosynthesis and biochemical adaptation of soil-grown Arabidopsis thaliana. Nanomaterials. 2019;9(11):1543. DOI: 10.3390/nano9111543
  72. 72. Kim J-H, Oh Y, Yoon H, Hwang I, Chang Y-S. Iron nanoparticle-induced activation of plasma membrane H+-ATPase promotes stomatal opening in Arabidopsis thaliana. Environmental Science & Technology. 2015;49(2):1113-1119. DOI: 10.1021/es504375t
  73. 73. Jaberzadeh A, Moaveni P, Moghadam HRT, Zahedi H. Influence of bulk and nanoparticles titanium foliar application on some agronomic traits, seed gluten and starch contents of wheat subjected to water deficit stress. Notulae Botanicae Horti Agrobotanici Cluj-Napoca. 2013;41(1):201-207. DOI: 10.15835/nbha4119093
  74. 74. Akbari G-A, Morteza E, Moaveni P, Alahdadi I, Bihamta M-R, Hasanloo T. Pigments apparatus and anthocyanins reactions of borage to irrigation, methylalchol and titanium dioxide. International Journal of Biosciences. 2014;4(7):192-208. DOI: 10.12692/ijb/4.7
  75. 75. Kiapour H, Moaveni P, Habibi D. Evaluation of the application of gibbrellic acid and titanium dioxide nanoparticles under drought stress on some traits of basil (Ocimum basilicum L). International Journal of Agronomy and Agricultural Research. 2015;6(4):138-150
  76. 76. Aghdam MTB, Mohammadi H, Ghorbanpour M. Effects of nanoparticulate anatase titanium dioxide on physiological and biochemical performance of Linum usitatissimum (Linaceae) under well-watered and drought stress conditions. Brazilian Journal of Botany. 2016;39(1):139-146. DOI: 10.1007/s40415-015-0227-x
  77. 77. Laware S, Raskar S. Effect of titanium dioxide nanoparticles on hydrolytic and antioxidant enzymes during seed germination in onion. International Journal of Current Microbiology and Applied Sciences. 2014;3(7):749-760
  78. 78. Hassan SA, Hagrassi AME, Hammam O, Soliman AM, Ezzeldin E, Aziz WM. Brassica juncea L.(Mustard) extract silver nanoparticles and knocking off oxidative stress, proinflammatory cytokine and reverse DNA genotoxicity. Biomolecules. 2020;10(12):1650. DOI: 10.3390/biom10121650
  79. 79. Hojjat SS, Ganjali A. The effect of silver nanoparticle on lentil seed germination under drought stress. International Journal of Farming and Allied Sciences. 2016;5(3):208-212
  80. 80. Djanaguiraman M, Nair R, Giraldo JP, Prasad PVV. Cerium oxide nanoparticles decrease drought-induced oxidative damage in sorghum leading to higher photosynthesis and grain yield. ACS Omega. 2018;3(10):14406-14416. DOI: 10.1021/acsomega.8b01894
  81. 81. García-Caparrós P, Hasanuzzaman M, Lao MT. Oxidative stress and antioxidant defense in plants under salinity. In: Hasanuzzaman M, Fotopoulos V, Nahar K, Fujita M, editors. Reactive Oxygen, Nitrogen and Sulfur Species in Plants: Production, Metabolism, Signaling and Defense Mechanisms. 1st ed. Chichester: Wiley; 2019. p. 291-309. DOI: 10.1002/9781119468677.ch12
  82. 82. Szymańska R, Ślesak I, Orzechowska A, Kruk J. Physiological and biochemical responses to high light and temperature stress in plants. Environmental and Experimental Botany. 2017;139:165-177. DOI: 10.1016/j.envexpbot.2017.05.002
  83. 83. Jalil SU, Ansari MI. Nanoparticles and abiotic stress tolerance in plants: Synthesis, action, and signaling mechanisms. In: Iqbal M, Khan R, Reddy PS, Ferrante A, Khan NA, editors. Plant Signaling Molecules. 1st ed. Woodhead Publishing; 2019. p. 549-561. DOI: 10.1016/B978-0-12-816451-8.00034-4
  84. 84. Prażak R, Święciło A, Krzepiłko A, Michałek S, Arczewska M. Impact of Ag nanoparticles on seed germination and seedling growth of green beans in normal and chill temperatures. Agriculture. 2020;10(8):312. DOI: 10.3390/agriculture10080312
  85. 85. Singh H, Kumar D, Soni V. Copper and mercury induced oxidative stresses and antioxidant responses of Spirodela polyrhiza (L.) Schleid. Biochemistry and Biophysics Reports. 2020;23:100781. DOI: 10.1016/j.bbrep.2020.100781
  86. 86. Manaf A, Wang X, Tariq F, Jhanzab HM, Bibi Y, Sher A, et al. Antioxidant enzyme activities correlated with growth parameters of wheat sprayed with silver and gold nanoparticle suspensions. Agronomy. 2021;11(8):1494. DOI: 10.3390/agronomy11081494
  87. 87. Giraldo JP, Landry MP, Faltermeier SM, McNicholas TP, Iverson NM, Boghossian AA, et al. Plant nanobionics approach to augment photosynthesis and biochemical sensing. Nature Materials. 2014;13(4):400-408. DOI: 10.103/nmat3890
  88. 88. Pavithra G, Reddy BR, Salimath M, Geetha K, Shankar A. Zinc oxide nano particles increases Zn uptake, translocation in rice with positive effect on growth, yield and moisture stress tolerance. Indian Journal of Plant Physiology. 2017;22(3):287-294. DOI: 10.1007/s40502-017-03032
  89. 89. Kaveh R, Li Y-S, Ranjbar S, Tehrani R, Brueck CL, Van Aken B. Changes in Arabidopsis thaliana gene expression in response to silver nanoparticles and silver ions. Environmental Science & Technology. 2013;47(18):10637-10644. DOI: 10.1021/es402209w
  90. 90. Mirzajani F, Askari H, Hamzelou S, Schober Y, Römpp A, Ghassempour A, et al. Proteomics study of silver nanoparticles toxicity on bacillus thuringiensis. Ecotoxicology and Environmental Safety. 2014;100:122-130. DOI: 10.1016/j.ecoenv.2013.10.009
  91. 91. Sofy AR, Sofy MR, Hmed AA, Dawoud RA, Alnaggar AE-AM, Soliman AM, et al. Ameliorating the adverse effects of tomato mosaic tobamovirus infecting tomato plants in Egypt by boosting immunity in tomato plants using zinc oxide nanoparticles. Molecules. 2021;26(5):1337. DOI: 10.3390/molecules26051337
  92. 92. Lei Z, Mingyu S, Xiao W, Chao L, Chunxiang Q , Liang C, et al. Antioxidant stress is promoted by nano-anatase in spinach chloroplasts under UV-B radiation. Biological Trace Element Research. 2008;121(1):69-79. DOI: 10.1007/s12011-007-8028-0
  93. 93. Fatemi H, Pour BE, Rizwan M. Foliar application of silicon nanoparticles affected the growth, vitamin C, flavonoid, and antioxidant enzyme activities of coriander (Coriandrum sativum) plants grown in lead (Pb)-spiked soil. Environmental Science and Pollution Research. 2021;28(2):1417-1425. DOI: 10.1007/s11356-020-10549-x
  94. 94. Banerjee J, Kole C. Plant nanotechnology: An overview on concepts, strategies, and tools. In: Kole C, Sakthi KD, Mariya VK, editors. Plant Nanotechnology: Principles and practices. 1st ed. Switzerland: Springer; 2016. p. 1-14. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-42154-4_1
  95. 95. Singh A, Tiwari S, Pandey J, Lata C, Singh IK. Role of nanoparticles in crop improvement and abiotic stress management. Journal of Biotechnology. 2021;337:57-70. DOI: 10.1016/j.jbiotec.2021.06.022
  96. 96. Kaphle A, Navya P, Umapathi A, Daima HK. Nanomaterials for agriculture, food and environment: Applications, toxicity and regulation. Environmental Chemistry Letters. 2018;16(1):43-58. DOI: 10.1007/s10311-017-0662-y
  97. 97. Raliya R, Franke C, Chavalmane S, Nair R, Reed N, Biswas P. Quantitative understanding of nanoparticle uptake in watermelon plants. Frontiers in Plant Science. 2016;7:1288. DOI: 10.3389/fpls.2016.01288
  98. 98. Zhao L, Lu L, Wang A, Zhang H, Huang M, Wu H, et al. Nano-biotechnology in agriculture: Use of nanomaterials to promote plant growth and stress tolerance. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry. 2020;68(7):1935-1947. DOI: 10.1021/acs.jafc.pb06615
  99. 99. Noori A, Donnelly T, Colbert J, Cai W, Newman LA, White JC. Exposure of tomato (Lycopersicon esculentum) to silver nanoparticles and silver nitrate: Physiological and molecular response. International Journal of Phytoremediation. 2020;22(1):40-51. DOI: 10.1080/15226514.2019.1634000
  100. 100. Zahedi SM, Karimi M, Teixeira da Silva JA. The use of nanotechnology to increase quality and yield of fruit crops. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture. 2020;100(1):25-31. DOI: 10.1002/jsfa.10004
  101. 101. Arif N, Yadav V, Singh S, Tripathi DK, Dubey NK, Chauhan DK, et al. Interaction of copper oxide nanoparticles with plants: Uptake, accumulation, and toxicity. In: Nanomaterials in Plants, Algae, and Microorganisms. Academic Press, India: Elsevier; 2018. pp. 297-310. DOI: 10.106/B978-0-12-811487-2.00013-X
  102. 102. Raliya R, Tarafdar JC, Biswas P. Enhancing the mobilization of native phosphorus in the mung bean rhizosphere using ZnO nanoparticles synthesized by soil fungi. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry. 2016;64(16):3111-3118. DOI: 10.1021/acs.jafc.5b05224
  103. 103. Larue C, Laurette J, Herlin-Boime N, Khodja H, Fayard B, Flank A-M, et al. Accumulation, translocation and impact of TiO2 nanoparticles in wheat (Triticum aestivum):Influence of diameter and crystal phase. Science of the Total Environment. 2012;431:197-208. DOI: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2012.04.073
  104. 104. Khan N, Bano A. Modulation of phytoremediation and plant growth by the treatment with PGPR, Ag nanoparticle and untreated municipal wastewater. International Journal of Phytoremediation. 2016;18(12):1258-1269. DOI: 10.1080/15226514.2014.1203287
  105. 105. Ali S, Mehmood A, Khan N. Uptake, translocation, and consequences of nanomaterials on plant growth and stress adaptation. Journal of Nanomaterials. 2021:17 Article ID 6677616. DOI: 10.1155/2021/6677616
  106. 106. Milewska-Hendel A, Sala K, Gepfert W, Kurczyńska E. Gold nanoparticles-induced modifications in cell wall composition in barley roots. Cell. 2021;10(8):1965. DOI: 10.3390/cells10081965
  107. 107. Lv J, Zhang S, Luo L, Zhang J, Yang K, Christie P. Accumulation, speciation and uptake pathway of ZnO nanoparticles in maize. Environmental Science: Nano. 2015;2(1):68-77. DOI: 10.1039/C4EN00064A
  108. 108. Hernandez-Viezcas JA, Castillo-Michel H, Andrews JC, Cotte M, Rico C, Peralta-Videa JR, et al. In situ synchrotron X-ray fluorescence mapping and speciation of CeO2 and ZnO nanoparticles in soil cultivated soybean (Glycine max). ACS Nano. 2013;7(2):1415-1423. DOI: 10.1021/nn305196q
  109. 109. Da Costa M, Sharma P. Effect of copper oxide nanoparticles on growth, morphology, photosynthesis, and antioxidant response in Oryza sativa. Photosynthetica. 2016;54(1):110-119. DOI: 10.1007/s11099-015-0167-5
  110. 110. Xiong T, Dumat C, Dappe V, Vezin H, Schreck E, Shahid M, et al. Copper oxide nanoparticle foliar uptake, phytotoxicity, and consequences for sustainable urban agriculture. Environmental Science & Technology. 2017;51(9):5242-5251. DOI: 10.1021/acs.est.6b05546
  111. 111. Jahagirdar PS, Gupta PK, Kulkarni SP, Devarajan PV. Polymeric curcumin nanoparticles by a facile in situ method for macrophage targeted delivery. Bioengineering & Translational Medicine. 2019;4(1):141-151. DOI: 10.1002/btm2.10112
  112. 112. Rao S, Shekhawat GS. Phytotoxicity and oxidative stress perspective of two selected nanoparticles in Brassica juncea. 3 Biotech. 2016;6(2):1-12. DOI: 10.1007/s13205-016-0550-3
  113. 113. Shende S, Rathod D, Gade A, Rai M. Biogenic copper nanoparticles promote the growth of pigeon pea (Cajanus cajan L.). IET Nanobiotechnology. 2017;11(7):773-781
  114. 114. Apodaca SA, Tan W, Dominguez OE, Hernandez-Viezcas JA, Peralta-Videa JR, Gardea-Torresdey JL. Physiological and biochemical effects of nanoparticulate copper, bulk copper, copper chloride, and kinetin in kidney bean (Phaseolus vulgaris) plants. Science of the Total Environment. 2017;599:2085-2094. DOI: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2017.05.095
  115. 115. Thuesombat P, Hannongbua S, Akasit S, Chadchawan S. Effect of silver nanoparticles on rice (Oryza sativa L. cv. KDML 105) seed germination and seedling growth. Ecotoxicology and Environmental Safety. 2014;104:302-309. DOI: 10.1016/j.ecoenv.2014.03.022
  116. 116. Adisa IO, Rawat S, Pullagurala VLR, Dimkpa CO, Elmer WH, White JC, et al. Nutritional status of tomato (Solanum lycopersicum) fruit grown in fusarium-infested soil: Impact of cerium oxide nanoparticles. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry. 2020;68(7):1986-1997. DOI: 0.1021/acs.jafc.9b06840
  117. 117. Raliya R, Nair R, Chavalmane S, Wang W-N, Biswas P. Mechanistic evaluation of translocation and physiological impact of titanium dioxide and zinc oxide nanoparticles on the tomato (Solanum lycopersicum L.) plant. Metallomics. 2015;7(12):1584-1594. DOI: 10.1039/c5mt00168d
  118. 118. Shinde S, Paralikar P, Ingle AP, Rai M. Promotion of seed germination and seedling growth of Zea mays by magnesium hydroxide nanoparticles synthesized by the filtrate from aspergillus Niger. Arabian Journal of Chemistry. 2020;13(1):3172-3182. DOI: 10.1016/j.arabjc.2018.10.001

Written By

Saba Nawaz, Iqra Maqsood, Fatima Batool, Zainab Y. Sandhu, Sameera Hassan, Faheem Akram and Bushra Rashid

Submitted: 08 December 2022 Reviewed: 25 January 2023 Published: 10 March 2023

© 2023 The Author(s). Licensee IntechOpen. This chapter is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Continue reading from the same book

View All
Chapter 10 Seed Nanopriming to Mitigate Abiotic Stresses in P...

By Afagh Yavari, Elham Ghasemifar and Mehdi Shahgolza...

297 downloads

Chapter 11 Toxic Aluminum and Water Deficit Interaction in Pl...

By Flávio José Rodrigues Cruz

110 downloads

Chapter 12 Microbial Mitigation of Drought Stress in Plants: ...

By Mohammad Sayyar Khan and Irba Zulfiqar

229 downloads