Next Article in Journal
The Impact of Local Food Festivals on Rural Areas’ Development
Previous Article in Journal
Diversity of Agro-Biological Traits and Development of Diseases in Alfalfa Cultivars during the Contrasting Vegetation Seasons
Previous Article in Special Issue
Nano-Microbial Remediation of Polluted Soil: A Brief Insight
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Review

Nanoparticle Mediated Plant Tolerance to Heavy Metal Stress: What We Know?

1
Botany Section, School of Sciences, Maulana Azad National Urdu University, Hyderabad 500032, India
2
Department of Biology, College of Science and Humanities, Prince Sattam Bin Abdulaziz University, Alkharj 11942, Saudi Arabia
3
Academy of Biology and Biotechnology, Southern Federal University, 344006 Rostov on Don, Russia
4
School of Life Sciences, Glocal University, Saharanpur 247121, India
5
Department of Biotechnology, Motilal Nehru National Institute of Technology Allahabad, Prayagraj 211004, India
6
Collaborative Innovation Center of Sustainable Forestry in Southern China, College of Forest Science, Nanjing Forestry University, Nanjing 210037, China
7
Plant Physiology Lab, Department of Botany, Aligarh Muslim University, Aligarh 202002, India
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
These authors contributed equally to this work.
Sustainability 2023, 15(2), 1446; https://doi.org/10.3390/su15021446
Submission received: 30 November 2022 / Revised: 5 January 2023 / Accepted: 9 January 2023 / Published: 12 January 2023

Abstract

:
Nanoparticles (NPs) are playing an important role in addressing various environmental constraints by giving ingenious and successful resolutions. Heavy metal (HM) stress has gained significant importance in the last few years because of its speedy incorporation into agricultural sectors. Due to exclusive physiochemical properties, NPs can be effectively applied for stress mitigation strategies. NPs are highly effective over bulk scale parts owing to the control of the enhanced surface area and the possibility for specific properties to enhance nutrient uptake. In the present review, we explore the use of NPs as an environmentally sound practice to enhance plant growth when exposed to abiotic stress, particularly HM stress. Furthermore, we display an extensive summary of recent progress concerning the role of NPs in HM stress tolerance. This review paper will also be useful for comprehending phytoremediation of contaminated soils and indicates the prospective research required for the cooperative submission of NPs in the soil for sustainable agriculture.

1. Introduction

Important technological progressions and modernizations have been made in current years in the field of crop growing to tackle the difficulties of sustainable manufacture and food safety [1]. Continuous agricultural innovations, such as the use of nanotechnology, are important to feed the rapidly growing world population. The term “Nanotechnology” was coined by Eric Drexler [2], and involves dealing with materials whose structures exhibit appreciably unique and enhanced chemical, physical, and biological possessions as a result of their particle size in the nanoscale [3]. Nanotechnology has great effects on the commercial implementation of nano minerals in the fields of information technology, engineering, medicine, food, and pigments, with pharmaceutical, biological, and electrical applications [4].
It is broadly understood that agricultural output needs to be increased to feed a global population which is carefully expected to be 2 billion in the next 30 years. The NPs are micro-elements that are extremely fine in nature with sizes ranging from 1–100 nm in at least two of their dimensions [5]. Garcia-Lopez et al. [6] reported that NPs play significant roles in plant growth, yield, and quality. They have existed in nature since the beginning of the Earth’s history in the form of ashes from volcanoes and woods fires, oxides of metals, and canals and oceans [7]. NPs possess unique catalytic properties [8], and remarkable progress has been noted during the past few years regarding their special features such as the high surface area to volume ratio and reactivity in comparison with bulk sized materials [9]. The effects of NPs on plants growth, photosynthesis, and hormonal content are described below in Table 1.
Potential NPs innovations have been employed in agriculture biotechnology, food safety, water and sewage treatment, biosensing, clinical diagnosis, and therapy application [10]. The input of NPs to enhance plant growth and productivity with the objective to increase quality and overall production of crops is presently being researched all over the world. NPs are of different types such as inorganic NPs, carbon-based NPs, dendrimers, and composites [11]. Carbon-based NPs include fullerenes and carbon nanotubes (single-walled and multi-walled), whereas inorganic NPs are broadly divided into metals (Au (gold), Ag (silver), and Al (aluminum), and metal oxides (ZnO, TiO2, Fe2O3, NiO, CoO, CeO2, etc.). Nanosized polymer networks built from branched units are considered dendrimers, while composite NPs are made by combining one type of NPs with another or with larger materials. NPs have been already successfully applied in agriculture and in environmental applications. Several studies have revealed that NPs could improve plant seed germination, plant photosynthesis, and resistance to oxidative stress, as well as crop yield and quality [12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20].
Heavy metals are included as one of the main abiotic stresses which reduces plant development and productivity all over the world (Figure 1) [38]. At present, extensive anthropogenic activities relay negative effects on plant development by accumulating HMs, and an increase in their concentration is immensely dangerous because HMs are toxic and mostly non-degradable in nature [39,40]. In soil, HMs get accumulated after leaching or being released after the oxidation process, making them easier to uptake by plants and ultimately affecting public health via the food chain [41].
Accumulation of metals instigates direct or indirect harmful effects causing morpho-physiological abnormalities (decreased photosynthesis, plant growth, biomass, and yield), giving rise to the formation of ROS resulting in redox homeostasis disruption, damaging plasma membrane of cells, proteins, lipids, and nucleic acids, and causing disorder in metabolic activities that ultimately lead to reduced agricultural productivity [40,42,43]. Therefore, increasing plant tolerance against HM stress is a significant goal to diminish worsening food construction and to meet the order for increased food delivery for the increasing global population [44].
In order to reduce HM toxicity in plants, exogenous application of NPs has emerged as a cost-effective strategy [45], and various studies have confirmed their positive impacts on plant growth and development (Table 1). For example, in a study performed by Wang et al. [45], Fe3O4 NPs stimulated root growth of Cucumis sativus, Solanum lycopersicum L., Lactuca sativa, and Daucus carota in the presence of Cd. According to a recent study by Faizan et al. [46], the application of ZnO NPs and SA to rice plants reduced the toxicity of As. As-applied plants showed reduced plant growth, gas exchange indices, maximum quantum yield, and a reduction in protein content. As-stressed rice plants receive foliar fertigation (ZnO NPs and/or SA,) which reduces the oxidative stress as seen by lower synthesis the levels of ROS. Under the influence of ZnO NPs and salicylic acid (SA), the enzymatic activities of CAT, SOD, and POX, as well as the contents of proline and total soluble proteins, all improved, all of which play a crucial role to control various transcriptional pathways involved to tolerate oxidative stress.
NPs enhance resistance of plants against several toxic elements i.e., Cr, Cd, Fe, Al, and Mn [47,48,49]. NP application has also been known to reduce the uptake and translocation of Cd [50], Mn [51], and Pb [52] in plant tissues. Moreover, NPs play an important role to protect plants against environmental stresses by boosting antioxidant activity, accumulation of osmolytes, and synthesis of free amino acids and nutrient enhancements (Figure 2) [53]. Doubtlessly, a huge void of information regarding the valuable functions of NPs in the regulation of metal stress is yet to be filled. This review highlights the mechanism of plant growth inhibition induced by HMs as well as the role of NPs in HM stress tolerance.

2. Mechanism of Plant Growth Inhibition Induced by Heavy Metals

Among others, some HMs, i.e., Cd, Pb, Cr, As, Fe, Mn, and Al have been deemed the most effective metals. Below is a brief description of the impact of these HMs on plant growth, development, and yield.

2.1. Cadmium (Cd)

Being one of the most notorious environmental pollutants, Cd causes significant adverse impacts on all organisms, affecting the health of plants and humans primarily via the food-chain through edible crops grown in Cd-polluted soil [54,55]. Geogenic (weathering of parent rocks and volcanic activity) and anthropogenic activities (irrigation with sewage, use of phosphate fertilizers and pesticides, manure application, fossil fuel combustion, mining, and smelting, as well as atmospheric precipitation) are the major Cd contributors in cultivable soils and fresh water reservoirs [56,57]. Owing to its potentially threatening demeanor (being readily absorbed, translocated, and accumulated in living cells, having a longer half-life and a non-biodegradable nature), it has escalated concerns among agriculturists and environmentalists [58].
Plants exposed to Cd toxicity have been reported to exhibit reduced biomass, photosynthesis, and productivity attributed to slower functioning at a morphological, physiological, and molecular level [59,60]. Saifullah et al. (2014) [61] elaborated that stomatal conductance and enzyme activities of plants can reduce post-Cd application. Moreover, the presence of Cd could enhance ROS generation and lead oxidative stress through enhanced H2O2 content, posing a threat to membrane integrity due to lipid peroxidation and overall damage to cellular proteins, nucleic acids, and lipids, which in extreme cases, could finally result in cell death [62].

2.2. Lead (Pb)

Heavy metal pollutants such as Pb can enter the soil via several ways and induce a broad range of toxicity to living organisms [63]. This metal remains stable in soil for a long period of time, is difficult to dissociate, and with the help of food chain, it eventually accumulates in the cells of living organisms including human beings [64]. Pb impairs cell division, growth, and performance of plants as well as chlorophyll contents [65].
In particular, seed germination rate is strongly affected by Pb and may result from its interference with a plant’s protease and amylase enzymes [66]. At low concentrations, Pb potentially causes loss of cristae, mitochondrial swelling, vacuolization of endoplasmic reticulum, and bent, short, and stubby roots [67]. Photosynthetic machinery and nutrient allocation may also deteriorate after lead exposure followed by growth retardation and plant death [68].

2.3. Chromium (Cr)

Cr was discovered by a French chemist Vauquelin and stands as the seventh most abundant element on the Earth’s crust [69]. The contamination of soil, sediments, and groundwater by this toxic metal may cause deleterious effects on plants and animals [70]. Cr is a non-essential element for plants; hence, they do not have any special mechanism for its uptake but due to its high solubility and oxidizing potential it becomes detrimental to their growth and development [71]. In nature, Cr is present in different oxidation states; among them trivalent (Cr3+) and hexavalent (Cr6+) are the most stable forms [72]. Cr6+ is considered to be more damaging than Cr3+ because of its association with O2 as chromate or dichromate; conversely, Cr3+ is associated with organic matter in soil [73].
Cr reduces seed germination by having effects on the activities of amylase and on the consequent sugars transport to the embryo axes; however, the activities of protease enzymes increase with its application, which may contribute to the decrease in seed germination, particularly of Cr-exposed seeds [74]. Barton et al. [75] demonstrated that the addition of Cr significantly inhibited the shoot growth in lucuma cultures. The leaf growth and size of spinach plants grown in 60 mg Cr kg−1 soil showed a marked decrease in growth rate and caused burning of leaf tips and/or margins [76]. In the study of Vajpayee et al. [77] on Vallisneria spiralis, Cr application in the nutrient medium considerably reduced biomass production and dry weight of the plant. The decrease in the dry matter is an indicator of Cr toxicity which decreases the size of the peripheral part of the Portulaca oleracea [78].

2.4. Iron (Fe)

Fe is an important element for plants [79,80]. It plays a vital role as a co-factor for various enzymes that are involved in respiration, photosynthesis, chloroplast synthesis, nucleic acid synthesis, enzyme catalyzed processes, metal homeostasis, and maintaining the structural and functional integrity of proteins and chlorophyll [81,82]. Moreover, Fe assists in energy production within the plants. However, a growth medium having low pH or an excessive application of Fe can induce toxicity in most plant species [83]. Plants suffering from Fe deficiency may exhibit symptoms of interveinal chlorosis and stunted growth. Discoloration of the leaf is due to the plant crating enzymes to control free radicals that are present in elevated Fe condition. The phytotoxicity of Fe could be of two types, i.e., direct and indirect [84], where absorption of the metal and accumulation in the plants represents the direct type of Fe toxicity, while Fe plaque formation on the root surface (which affects nutrient absorption) falls under the second category [85].

2.5. Manganese (Mn)

Mn is an important mineral nutrient for plants, and plays a pivotal role in several physio-biochemical processes. In crop plants, excessive Mn is disadvantageous and may significantly reduce fresh and dry biomass and photosynthetic activities, as well as cause biochemical disorders [86]. It is readily transported from root to shoot via transpiration stream; however, it is not readily remobilized thorough phloem to the other tissues or organs once it reaches the leaves [87] and its toxicity is a fairly general problem over other micronutrients. Elevated contents of Mn may result in necrotic brown patches on plants leaves and petioles, as well as on stems [88].

3. Role of Nanoparticles on Heavy Metal Stress Tolerance

The application of NPs not only shows positive impacts on plants but also is effectual in eliminate metals from polluted sites using possibilities such as a phytoremediation approach [88]. Different types of NPs are developed based on the application and usage, such as those containing inorganic nonmetallic NPs, carbon-based NPs, metallic NPs, and organic polymeric materials. Plant-based methods known as phytoremediation are used for clearing or removing a number of soil impurities; they are interesting procedures that revolve around a plant–nanoparticles interaction to promote plant growth, increase phyto-availability of pollutants, and eliminate toxic pollutants from contaminated soil [89]. Phytoextraction is one of the most important remediation procedures for the Pb elimination [90], and the input of NPs with plants has been noted to be effective for enhancing Pb phytoextraction. A study showed that the co-application of Lolium (ryegrass) and nanohydroxyapatite eliminated 30% of Pb from the soil after one month and 44.39% after 3 months [91].
HM pollution is very hazardous for living organisms, which raises concern all over the world [92]. These metals exist in our environment in small quantities due to natural processes like volcanic eruption and rock weathering. In the last few decades, concentrations of these HMs have increased in the environment due to anthropogenic activities like mining, fossil fuel combustion, and poor drainage systems of factories [93]. Soil becomes the ultimate reservoir for all the released HMs, including Cd, Pb, Zn, and Cu, which are easily taken up by plants through their roots when grown in heavy metal-laced agricultural lands. When these HMs enter the plant tissues, they affect the plant life cycle and cause stunted growth and lower yields [94]. Pb and Cd metal ions are released into farming lands, air, and water, causing important environmental issues because of their deleterious effect on human health and the ecosystem [95]. Several investigations indicate that some crops are hyper accumulators of HMs [17,63]; these plant species have adapted to endure the toxicity while accumulating heavy metals in their tissues. These HM accumulators are more harmful for human beings because they sneak the HMs into our food chain. It has been reported that more than 80% of HMs are ingested via food crops [96]. A study also found that during 1998–2001, native populations consumed more than 35% of Cd from rice [97]. Some HMs, like Zn and Mn, are beneficial for plants and animals at lower concentrations; the situation reverses and they become toxic to plants once their concentration increases above a threshold value, and they contaminate the soil and water [98,99].
To remove these metals from contaminated soils, different techniques such as electronic remediation, biosorption, bioleaching, and bioremediation are employed [45]. Application of silicon dioxide improved the Cd, Cu, and Mn stress tolerance potential of Artemisia pygmaea by augmenting biomass accumulation and increasing the activities of different biocatalysts in the plant. In the last few years, nanotechnology has become a well-established field in the agricultural realm. Numerous pieces of evidence have shown the ability of NPs to improve plant growth, development, and yield, as presented in Table 1 [100,101,102]. Nanotechnology could be proposed as an important tool for environmental cleansing. Studies have shown that NPs have special properties which can be utilized to reduce the harmful effects of natural HMs resources (Table 2).
Furthermore, there is less literature on the potential role of NPs in mitigating the phytotoxic effects caused by HMs and removal of HMs from contaminated soil and waters but what exists is very convincing [117,118,119]. Due to an increase in the concentration of HMs in soil and water worldwide because of human activities, there is an urgent need to solve this problem so as to contain their harmful effects on plants and animals. Using the NPs to delimit HMs toxicity is one link among several. Nanotechnology in agriculture is used to improve plant growth and development due to the unusual characteristics of NPs as many experiments during the last few years have supported the notion that the toxic effects of HMs in plants could be checked by NPs application. Rizwan et al. (2019) [94] reported that ZnO NPs, either individually or in combination with biochar, effectively alleviate the Cd toxicity in maize plants when given as a foliar spray.
Although, NPs can be low-cost approach to reduce HMs toxicity in plants, their role in ameliorating oxidative stress and root-growth inhibition caused by HMs has been seldom studied [45,63]. Results from trials conducted to find the effects of Fe3O4 in Cd, Pb, Zn, and Cu toxicity in wheat seedlings show that Fe3O4 effectively alleviated the inhibition caused by these HMs; the goal was achieved mainly by protecting the plants from oxidative stress with increased antioxidant enzyme activity [92]. Moreover, Cui et al. (2017) [120] reported similar results where Si NPs reduced the Cd toxicity in rice. Their findings also suggest that Si NPs have the ability to protect against cell damage caused by Cd. Similarly, Wang et al. (2015) [121] revealed that a Si NP hydrosol can relieve toxicity generated by Cd in rice by diminishing its uptake, lowering the malondialdehyde (MDA) level, increasing the assimilation of certain mineral components, and triggering antioxidant activity. Si NP hydrosol application was presented as an economical and environmentally friendly approach to minimize the accumulation of Cd in rice by Liu et al. [122]. Root growth inhibition was also reduced by Fe3O4 NPs in four plants (tomato, cucumber, lettuce, and carrot) under Cd stress [92]. Protection against oxidative stress caused by Cd and Pb in Leucaena leucocephala was reported with ZnO NPs, mollifying the toxic effects of these heavy metals [123].
Foliar-applied ZnO NPs on tomato plants exposed to Cd metals also mitigated their deleterious effects and improved plant growth by increasing the antioxidant enzymes and nitrate reductase activity [124]. Very interesting results were reported by Sing and Lee (2016) [88] with TiO2 NPs. They found that soil contaminated with Cd decreased the plant growth, biomass, and protein content in soybean plants, while the application of TiO2 NPs not only improved the photosynthetic rate and growth but also increased the uptake of Cd from soil to plant, thus minimizing their toxic effects. Moreover, Li and Huang [125] and Faraji and Sepehri (2018) [50] reported that NPs alleviate the HMs toxicity in Brassica chinensis and wheat, respectively. Nano hydroxyapatite increased the chlorophyll level and vitamin C and decreased the MDA content in Brassica chinensis under Cd stress. In conclusion, we find that in most cases NPs protect the plants from oxidative stress and cell disintegration when exposed to HMs, increasing the antioxidant enzyme activity and reducing HM uptake in plants.
Overall, these studies show that NPs have a potential to mitigate the HMs toxicity in plants and could improve plant growth, biomass, and yields. This necessitates further research in order to find the underlying mechanism of NPs in the combat against HM toxicity. Although most results talk about the alleviation of Cd toxicity by NPs, extensive research is still indispensable to explore the effects with different HMs and different crops. It was also reported that rGO (reduced grapheme oxide) hybridized with magnetic and/or elemental silver nanoparticles (rGO/magnetite, rGO/magnetite/silver and rGO/silver) is a potential adsorbent for noxious heavy metals such as Cd, Ni, Zn, Pb, Cu, and Co. These nanohybrids (NHs) showed more adsorption efficiency than the sorbents already reported, including resins, activated biochar, and hydrated nano-sized Zn oxide particles [126].

4. Conclusions

Crop production globally has undergone several challenges in terms of climate and stresses. Heavy metal contamination and remediation approaches have received significant attention worldwide due to the non-biodegradable nature of many HMs, whose persistence in the soil for a long period of time can be dangerous to soil biota as well as human health. Many strategies have been successfully applied to enhance the tolerance of plants to grow in metal-polluted soils, whether by tolerating or accumulating excessive metal in plant tissues. To overcome the hazardous effects of HMs, nanotechnology has come up as a key component for sustainable development. The input of NPs in plants to tolerate HM toxicity and for remediation of these toxic elements is the best and most economic approach recently developed. Due to their properties of being able to penetrate plants over a large surface area, more effective adsorption, and targeted delivery, they can be responsible for helping regulate photosynthesis and detoxifying reactive oxygen species, thereby enhancing seed germination, growth, and yield of crops. NPs also helps plants to grow well by modulation of mobile or immobile forms of HMs. The positive results exhibited by the application of NPs, specifically increasing HM tolerance and promoting the growth ability of plants, indicate that their application in remediating metal-polluted soils might have noteworthy potential in the near future.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, S.H., T.M. and F.-Y.Y.; methodology, M.F.; writing—original draft preparation, P.A., V.D.R., A.F. and S.A.; writing—review and editing, S.M.A.; visualization, P.A.; supervision, S.H. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

Not applicable.

Acknowledgments

V.D.R. and T.M. acknowledge the support of the Russian Science Foundation, project no. 21-77-20089 at the Southern Federal University.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Kou, T.J.; Yu, W.W.; Lam, S.K.; Chen, D.L.; Hou, Y.P.; Li, Z.Y. Differential root responses in two cultivars of winter wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) to elevated ozone concentration under fully open-air field conditions. J. Agron. Crop Sci. 2018, 204, 325–332. [Google Scholar]
  2. Fortina, P.; Kricka, L.J.; Surrey, S.; Grodzinski, P. Nanotechnology, the promise and reality of new approaches to molecular recognition. Trends Biotechnol. 2005, 23, 168. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  3. Raje, K.; Ojha, S.; Mishra, A.; Munde, V.K.; Rawat, C.; Chaudhary, S.K. Impact of supplementation of mineral nano particles on growth performance and health status of animals, A review. J. Ento. Zool. Stud. 2018, 6, 1690–1694. [Google Scholar]
  4. Menazea, A.A.; Abdelghany, A.M.; Hakeem, N.A.; Osman, W.H.; Abd El-kader, F.H. Nd:YAG Nanosecond Laser Pulses for Precipitation Silver Nanoparticles in Silicate Glasses: AC Conductivity and Dielectric Studies. Silicon 2018, 12, 13–20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Afzal, S.; Singh, N.K. Effect of zinc and iron oxide nanoparticles on plant physiology, seed quality and microbial community structure in a rice-soil-microbial ecosystem. Environ. Pollut. 2022, 314, 120224. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  6. Garcia-Lopez, J.I.; Nino-Medina, G.; Olivares-Saenz, E.; Lira-Saldivar, R.; Barriga-Castro, E.D.; Vazquez-Alvardo, R.; Rodriguez-Salinas, P.A.; Zavala-Garcia, F. Foliar Application of Zinc Oxide Nanoparticles and Zinc Sulfate Boosts the Content of Bioactive Compounds in Habanero Peppers. Plants 2019, 8, 254. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  7. Bernhardt, E.S.; Colman, B.P.; Hochella, M.F.; Cardinale, B.J.; Nisbet, M.; Richardson, C.J.; Yin, L. An ecological perspective on nanomaterial impacts in the environment. J. Environ. Qual. 2010, 39, 1954–1965. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Migowski, P.; Dupont, J. Catalytic applications of metal nanoparticles in imidazoliumionic liquids. Chemistry 2007, 13, 32–39. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  9. Afzal, S.; Aftab, T.; Singh, N.K. Impact of Zinc Oxide and Iron Oxide Nanoparticles on Uptake, Translocation, and Physiological Effects in Oryza sativa L. J. Plant Growth Regul. 2022, 41, 1445–1461. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Cheng, Y.; Morshed, R.A.; Auffinger, B.; Tobias, A.L.; Lesniak, M.S. Multifunctional nanoparticles for brain tumor imaging and therapy. Adv. Drug Deliv. Rev. 2014, 66, 42–57. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  11. Srivastava, V.; Gusain, D.; Sharma, Y.C. A critical review on the toxicity of some widely engineered nanoparticles. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 2015, 54, 6209–6233. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Raliya, R.; Tarafdar, J.C. ZnO nanoparticle biosynthesis and its effect on phosphorous-mobilizing enzyme secretion and gum contents in Clusterbean (Cyamopsis tetragonoloba L.). Agric. Res. 2013, 2, 48–57. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Zafar, H.; Ali, A.; Ali, J.S.; Haq, I.U.; Zia, M. Effect of ZnO nanoparticles on Brassica nigra seedlings and stem explants growth dynamics and antioxidative response. Front. Plant Sci. 2016, 7, 535. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  14. Prasad, T.N.; Sudhakar, P.; Sreenivasulu, Y.; Latha, P.; Munaswamy, V.; Reddy, K.R.; Sreeprasad, T.S.; Sajanlal, P.R.; Pradeep, T. Effect of nanoscale zinc oxide particles on the germination.; growth and yield of peanut. J. Plant Nut. 2012, 35, 905–927. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Furlani, P.R.; Clark, R.B. Screening sorghum for aluminium tolerance in nutrient solution. Agron. J. 1981, 73, 587–594. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Lopez-Moreno, M.; de la Rosa, G.; Hernandez-Viezcas, J.; Castillo-Michel, H.; Botez, C.; Peralta-Videa, J.; Gardea-Torresdey, J. Evidence of the differential biotransformation and genotoxicity of ZnO and CeO nanoparticles on soybean (Glycine max) plants. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2010, 44, 7315–7320. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  17. Cao, F.; Liu, L.; Ibrahim, W.; Cai, Y. Alleviating effects of exogenous glutathione, glycinebetaine, brassinosteroids and salicylic acid on cadmium toxicity in rice seedlings (Oryza sativa). Agrotech 2013, 2, 107–112. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  18. Rico, C.M.; Majumdar, S.; Duarte-Gardea, M.; Peralta-Videa, J.R.; Gardea-Torresdey, J.L. Interaction of nanoparticles with edible plants and their possible implications in the food chain. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2011, 59, 3485–3498. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  19. Djanaguiraman, M.; Belliraj, N.; Bossmann, S.H.; Prasad, P.V.V. High-temperature stress alleviation by selenium nanoparticle treatment in grain sorghum. ACS Omega 2018, 3, 2479–2491. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  20. Abd El-Aziz, M.E.; Morsi, S.M.M.; Salama, D.M.; Abdel-Aziz, M.S.; Abd Elwahed, M.S.; Shaaban, E.A.; Youssef, A.M. Preparation and characterization of chitosan/polyacrylicacid/copper nanocomposites and their impact on onion production. Int. J. Biol. Macromol. 2019, 123, 856–865. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Vannini, C.; Domingo, G.; Onelli, E.; Prinsi, B.; Marsoni, M.; Espen, L.; Bracale, M. Morphological and proteomic responses of Eruca sativa exposed to silver nanoparticles or silver nitrate. PLoS ONE 2013, 8, 68752. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  22. Pokhrel, L.R.; Dubey, B. Evaluation of developmental responses of two crop plants exposed to silver and zinc oxide nanoparticles. Sci. Total Environ. 2013, 45, 321–332. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  23. Yang, R.; Diao, Y.; Abayneh, B. Removal of Hg(0) from simulated flue gas over silver-loaded rice husk gasification char. R. Soc. Open Sci. 2018, 5, 180248. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  24. Haghighi, M.; Afifipour, Z.; Mozafarian, M. The effect of N-Si on tomato seed germination under salinity levels. J. Biol. Environ. Sci. 2012, 6, 87–90. [Google Scholar]
  25. Riahi-Madvar, A.; Rezaee, F.; Jalali, V. Effects of alumina nanoparticles on morphological properties and antioxidant system of Triticum aestivum. Iran. J. Plant Physiol. 2012, 3, 595–603. [Google Scholar]
  26. Yasmeen, F.; Raja, N.I.; Razzaq, A.; Komatsu, S. Gel-free/label-free proteomic analysis of wheat shoot in stress tolerant varieties under iron nanoparticles exposure. Biochim. Biophys. Acta 2016, 1864, 1586–1598. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Lin, D.; Xing, B. Phytotoxicity of nanoparticles, Inhibition of seed germination and root growth. Environ. Pollut. 2007, 150, 243–250. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Mustafa, G.; Komatsu, S. Insights into the response of soybean mitochondrial proteins to various sizes of aluminum oxide nanoparticles under flooding stress. J. Proteome Res. 2016, 15, 4464–4475. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Larue, C.; Laurette, J.; Herlin-Boime, N.; Khodja, H.; Fayard, B.; Flank, A.; Brisset, F.; Brisset, M. Accumulation translocation and impact of TiO2 nanoparticles in wheat (Triticum aestivum spp.), Influence of diameter and crystal phase. Sci. Total Environ. 2012, 43, 197–208. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Hao, Y.; Fang, P.; Ma, C.; White, J.C.; Xiang, Z.; Wang, H.; Zhang, Z.; Rui, Y.; Xing, B. Engineered nanomaterials inhibit Podosphaera pannosa infection on rose leaves by regulating phytohormones. Environ. Res. 2018, 170, 1–6. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Hong, F.H.; Zhou, J.; Liu, C.; Yang, F.; Wu, C.; Zheng, L.; Yang, P. Effect of nano-TiO2 on photochemical reaction of chloroplasts of spinach. Biol. Trace Elem. Res. 2005, 105, 269–279. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  32. Song, G.; Gao, Y.; Wu, H.; Hou, W.; Zhang, C.; Ma, H. Physiological effect of anatase TiO2 nanoparticles on Lemn. Minor. Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 2012, 31, 2147–2152. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  33. Mohammadi, R.; Maali-Amiri, R.; Abbasi, A. Effect of TiO2 nanoparticles on chickpea response to cold stress. Biol. Trace Elem. Res. 2013, 152, 403–410. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  34. Zheng, L.; Hong, F.; Lu, S.; Liu, C. Effect of nano-TiO2 on strength of naturally aged seeds and growth of spinach. Biol. Trace Elem. Res. 2005, 104, 83–91. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Linglan, M.; Chao, L.; Chunxiang, Q.; Sitao, Y.; Jie, L.; Fengqing, G.; Fashui, H. Rubisco activase mRNA expression in spinach, Modulation by nanoanatase treatment. Biol. Trace Elem. Res. 2008, 122, 168–178. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  36. Rui, M.; Ma, C.; Hao, Y.; Guo, J.; Rui, Y.; Tang, X.; Zhao, Q.; Fan, X.; Zhang, Z.; Hou, T.; et al. Iron Oxide Nanoparticles as a Potential Iron Fertilizer for Peanut (Arachis hypogaea). Front. Plant Sci. 2016, 7, 815. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  37. Feizi, H.; Moghaddam, P.R.; Shahtahmassebi, N.; Fotovot, A. Assessment of concentration of nano and bulk iron oxide particles on early growth of wheat (Triticum aestivum L.). Annu. Rev. Res. Biol. 2013, 3, 752–761. [Google Scholar]
  38. Ojuederie, O.B.; Olanrewaju, O.S.; Babalola, O.O. Plant Growth Promoting Rhizobacterial Mitigation of Drought Stress in Crop Plants, Implications for Sustainable Agriculture. Agronomy 2019, 9, 712. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  39. Sheng, J.J.; Wang, X.P.; Gong, P.; Tian, L.D.; Yao, T.D. Heavy metals of the Tibetan top soils Level source spatial distribution temporal variation and risk assessment. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2012, 19, 3362–3370. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Shahid, M.; Khalid, S.; Abbas, G.; Shahid, N.; Nadeem, M.; Sabir, M. Heavy metal stress and crop productivity. In Crop Production and Global Environmental Issues; Hakeem, K.R., Ed.; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2015; pp. 1–25. [Google Scholar]
  41. Hossain, M.B.; Jahiruddin, M.; Panaullah, G.M.; Loeppert, R.H.; Islam, M.R.; Duxbury, J.M. Spatial variability of arsenic concentration in soils and plants and its relationship with iron manganese and phosphorus. Environ. Pollut. 2008, 156, 739–744. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Hassan, T.U.; Bano, A.; Naz, I. Alleviation of heavy metals toxicity by the application of plant growth promoting rhizobacteria and effects on wheat grown in saline sodic field. Int. J. Phytoremediation 2017, 19, 522–529. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  43. Khan, A.; Khan, A.L.; Muneer, S.; Kim, Y.H.; Al-Rawahi, A.; Al-Harrasi, A. Silicon and Salinity, Crosstalk in crop-mediated stress tolerance mechanisms. Front. Plant Sci. 2019, 10, 1429. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  44. Shahv, F.; Wu, W. Soil and crop management strategies to ensure higher crop productivity within sustainable environments. Sustainability 2019, 11, 1485. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  45. Wang, M.; Chen, L.; Chen, S.; Ma, Y. Alleviation of cadmium-induced root growth Farinhibition in crop seedlings by nanoparticles. Ecotoxicol. Environ. Saf. 2012, 79, 48–54. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  46. Faizan, M.; Sehar, S.; Rajput, V.D.; Faraz, A.; Afzal, S.; Minkina, T.; Sushkova, S.; Adil, M.F.; Yu, F.; Alatar, A.A.; et al. Modulation of cellular redox status and antioxidant defense system after synergistic application of zinc oxide nanoparticles and salicylic acid in rice (Oryza sativa) plant under arsenic stress. Plants 2021, 10, 2254. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Shen, Y.; Tang, J.; Nie, Z.; Wang, Y.; Ren, Y.; Zuo, L. Preparation and application of magnetic Fe3O4 nanoparticles for wastewater purification. Sep. Purif. Technol. 2009, 68, 312–319. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Skiba, E.; Wolf, W.M. Cerium Oxide Nanoparticles Affect Heavy Metals Uptake by Pea in a Divergent Way than Their Ionic and Bulk Counterparts. Water Air Soil Pollut. 2019, 230, 248. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  49. Zadeh, R.R.; Arvin, S.M.J.; Jamei, R.; Mozaffari, H.; Nejhad, F.R. Response of tomato plants to interaction effects of magnetic (Fe3O4) nanoparticles and cadmium stress. J. Plant Interact. 2019, 14, 474–481. [Google Scholar]
  50. Faraji, J.; Sepehri, A.; Salcedo-Reyes, J.C. Titanium dioxide nanoparticles and sodium nitroprusside alleviate the adverse effects of cadmium stress on germination and seedling growth of wheat (Triticum aestivum L.). Univ. Sci. 2018, 23, 61–87. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Ragab, G.A.; Saad-Allah, K.M. Green synthesis of sulfur nanoparticles using Ocimum basilicum leaves and its prospective effect on manganese-stressed Helianthus annuus (L.) seedlings. Ecotoxicol. Environ. Saf. 2020, 191, 110242. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Cai, F.; Wu, X.; Zhang, H.; Shen, X.; Zhang, M.; Chen, W.; Gao, Q.; White, J.C.; Tao, S.; Wang, X. Impact of TiO2 nanoparticles on lead uptake and bioaccumulation in rice (Oryza sativa L.). Nano Impact 2017, 5, 101–108. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Farhangi-Abriz, S.; Torabian, S. Nano-silicon alters antioxidant activities of soybean seedlings under salt toxicity. Protoplasma 2018, 255, 953–962. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  54. Kabir, E.; Kumar, V.; Kim, K.H.; Yip, A.C.K.; Sohn, J.R. Environmental impacts of nanomaterials. J. Environ. Manag. 2018, 225, 261–271. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  55. Adil, M.F.; Sehar, S.; Chen, G.; Chen, Z.H.; Jilani, G.; Chaudhry, A.N.; Shamsi, I.H. Cadmium-zinc cross-talk delineates toxicity tolerance in rice via differential genes expression and physiological/ultrastructural adjustments. Ecotoxicol. Environ. Saf. 2020, 190, 110076. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Ahmad, I.; Akhtar, M.J.; Zahir, Z.A.; Naveed, M.; Mitter, B.; Sessitsch, A. Cadmium-tolerant bacteria induce metal stress tolerance in cereals. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. Int. 2014, 21, 11054–11065. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Adil, M.F.; Sehar, S.; Han, Z.; Lwalaba, J.L.W.; Jilani, G.; Zeng, F.; Chen, Z.H.; Shamsi, I.H. Zinc alleviates cadmium toxicity by modulating photosynthesis ROS homeostasis and ion flux kinetics in rice. Environ. Pollut. 2020, 265, 114979. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Song, Y.; Jin, L.; Wang, X. Cadmium absorption and transportation pathways in plants. Int. J. Phytoremediation 2016, 19, 133–141. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Baycu, G.; Gevrek-Kürüm, N.; Moustaka, J.; Csatári, I.; Rognes, S.E.; Moustakas, M. Cadmium-zinc accumulation and photosystem II responses of Noccaea caerulescens to Cd and Zn exposure. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2017, 24, 2840–2850. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Qayyum, M.F.; Rehman, M.Z.; Ali, S.; Rizwan, M.; Naeem, A.; Maqsood, M.A.; Khalid, H.; Rinklebe, J.; Ok, Y.S. Residual effects of monoammonium phosphate.; gypsum and elemental sulfur on cadmium phytoavailability and translocation from soil to wheat in an effluent irrigated field. Chemosphere 2017, 174, 515–523. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Saifullah, S.N.; Bibi, S.; Ahmad, M.; Ok, Y.S. Effectiveness of zinc application to minimize cadmium toxicity and accumulation in wheat (Triticum aestivum L.). Environ. Earth Sci. 2014, 71, 1663–1672. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Vasiljeva, S.; Smirnova, G.; Basova, N.; Babarykin, D. Cadmium-Induced Oxidative Damage and Protective Action of Fractioned Red Beet (Beta vulgaris) Root Juice in Chickens. Agron. Res. 2018, 16, 1517–1526. [Google Scholar]
  63. Li, X.M.; Bu, N.; Li, Y.; Ma, L.; Xin, S.; Zhang, L. Growth photosynthesis and antioxidant responses of endophyte infected and non-infected rice under lead stress conditions. J. Hazard Mater. 2012, 213–214, 55–61. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  64. Jiao, W.; Chen, W.; Chang, A.C.; Page, A.L. Environmental risks of trace elements associated with long-term phosphate fertilizers applications, a review. Environ. Pollut. 2012, 168, 44–53. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Maestri, E.; Marmiroli, M.; Visioli, G.; Marmiroli, N. Metal tolerance and hyperaccumulation, costs and trade-offs between traits and environment. Environ. Exp. Bot. 2010, 68, 1–13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Sengar, R.S.; Gautam, M.; Sengar, R.S.; Sengar, R.S.; Garg, S.K.; Sengar, K.; Chaudhary, R. Lead stress effects on physiobiochemical activities of higher plants. Rev. Environ. Contam. Toxicol. 2009, 196, 73–93. [Google Scholar]
  67. Jiang, W.; Liu, D. Pb-induced cellular defense system in the root meristematic cells of Allium sativum L. BMC Plant Biol. 2010, 10, 40. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  68. Islam, E.; Liu, D.; Li, T.; Yang, X.; Jin, X.; Mahmood, Q.; Tian, S.; Li, J. Effect of Pb toxicity on leaf growth physiology and ultrastructure in the two ecotypes of Elsholtzia argyi. J. Hazard. Mater. 2008, 154, 914–926. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Mohan, D.; Pittman, C.U. Activated carbons and low cost adsorbents for remediation of tri-and hexavalent chromium from water. J. Hazard. Mater. 2006, 137, 762–811. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Diwan, H.; Khan, I.; Ahmad, A.; Iqbal, M. Induction of phytochelatins and antioxidant defence system in Brassica juncea and Vigna radiata in response to chromium treatments. Plant Growth Regul. 2010, 61, 97–107. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. Shanker, A.K.; Cervantes, C.; Loza-Tavera, H.; Avudainayagam, S. Chromium toxicity in plants. Environ. Int. 2005, 31, 739–753. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Augustynowicz, J.; Grosicki, M.; Hanus-Fajerska, E.; Lekka, M.; Waloszek, A.; Koloczek, H. Chromium (VI) bioremediation by aquatic macrophyte Callitriche cophocarpa Sendtn. Chemosphere 2010, 79, 1077–1083. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  73. Becquer, T.; Quantin, C.; Sicot, M.; Boudot, J.P. Chromium availability in ultramafic soils from New Caledonia. Sci. Total Environ. 2003, 301, 251–261. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  74. Zeid, I.M. Response of Phaseolus vulgaris to chromium and cobalt treatments. Biol. Plant 2001, 44, 111–115. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Barton, L.L.; Johnson, G.V.; O’Nan, A.G.; Wagener, B.M. Inhibition of ferric chelate reductase in alfalfa roots by cobalt nickel chromium and copper. J. Plant Nutr. 2000, 23, 1833–1845. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  76. Sing, A.K. Effect of trivalent and hexavalent chromium on spinach (Spinacea oleracea L). Environ. Ecol. 2001, 19, 807–810. [Google Scholar]
  77. Vajpayee, P.; Rai, U.N.; Ali, M.B.; Tripathi, R.D.; Yadav, V.; Sinha, S. Chromium induced physiological changes in Vallisneria spiralis L and its role in phytoremediation of tannery effluent. Bull. Environ. Contam. Toxicol. 2001, 67, 246–256. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  78. Zurayk, R.; Sukkariyah, B.; Baalbaki, R. Common hydrophytes as bioindicators of nickel chromium and cadmium pollution. Water Air Soil Pollut. 2001, 127, 373–388. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  79. Celletti, S.; Lanz, M.; Bergamo, A.; Benedetti, V.; Basso, D.; Baratieri, M.; Cesco, S.; Mimmo, T. Evaluating the Aqueous Phase from Hydrothermal Carbonization of Cow Manure Digestate as Possible Fertilizer Solution for Plant Growth. Front. Plant Sci. 2022, 12, 1317. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  80. Muller, C.; Silveira, S.; Daloso, D.M.; Mendes, G.C.; Merchant, A.; Kuki, K.N.; Oliva, M.A.; Loureiro, M.E.; Almeida, A.M. Ecophysiological responses to excess iron in lowland and upland rice cultivars. Chemosphere 2017, 189, 123–133. [Google Scholar]
  81. Li, W.; Lan, P. The Understanding of the Plant Iron Deficiency Responses in Strategy I Plants and the Role of Ethylene in This Process by Omic Approaches. Front. Plant Sci. 2017, 8, 40. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  82. Bashir, K.; Rasheed, S.; Kobayashi, T.; Seki, M.; Nishizawa, N.K. Regulating Subcellular Metal Homeostasis, The Key to Crop Improvement. Front. Plant Sci. 2016, 7, 1192. [Google Scholar]
  83. Haider, F.U.; Liqun, C.; Coulter, J.A.; Cheema, S.A.; Wu, J.; Zhang, R.; Wenjun, M.; Farooq, M. Cadmium toxicity in plants: Impacts and remediation strategies. Ecotoxicol. Environ. Saf. 2021, 211, 111887. [Google Scholar]
  84. Araújo, I.P.S.; Costa, D.B.; De Moraes, R.J.B. Identification and Characterization of Particulate Matter Concentrations at Construction Jobsites. Sustainability 2014, 6, 7666–7688. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  85. Siqueira-Silva, A.I.; Rios, C.O.; Pereira, E.G. Iron toxicity resistance strategies in tropical grasses, The role of apoplastic radicular barriers. J. Environ. Sci. (China) 2019, 78, 257–266. [Google Scholar]
  86. Santos, E.F.; Kondo Santini, J.M.; Paixão, A.P.; Júnior, E.F.; Lavres, J.; Campos, M.; dos Reis, A.R. Physiological highlights of manganese toxicity symptoms in soybean plants, Mn toxicity responses. Plant Physiol. Biochem. 2017, 113, 6–19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  87. Alejandro, S.; Holler, S.; Meier, B.; Peiter, E. Manganese in Plants: From Acquisition to subcellular allocation. Front. Plant Sci. 2020, 11, 300. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  88. Wu, S. Effect of manganese excess on the soybean plant cultivated under various growth conditions. J. Plant Nutr. 1994, 17, 991–1003. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  89. Singh, J.; Lee, B.K. Influence of nano-TiO2 particles on the bioaccumulation of Cd in soybean plants (Glycine max), a possible mechanism for the removal of Cd from the contaminated soil. J. Environ. Manag. 2016, 170, 88–96. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  90. Liang, S.-X.; Jin, Y.; Liu, W.; Li, X.; Shen, S.-G.; Ding, L. Feasibility of Pb phytoextraction using nano-materials assisted ryegrass, results of a one-year field-scale experiment. J. Environ. Manag. 2017, 190, 170–175. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  91. Ali, H.; Khan, E.; Sajad, M.A. Phytoremediation of heavy metals-Concepts and applications. Chemosphere 2013, 91, 869–881. [Google Scholar]
  92. Lobzenko, I.; Burachevskaya, M.; Zamulina, I.; Barakhov, A.; Bauer, T.; Mandzhieva, S.; Sushkova, S.; Minkina, T.; Tereschenko, A.; Kalinichenko, V.; et al. Development of a Unique Technology for the Pyrolysis of Rice Husk Biochar for Promising Heavy Metal Remediation. Agriculture 2022, 12, 1689. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  93. Konate, A.; He, X.; Zhang, Z.; Ma, Y.; Zhang, P.; Alugongo, G.M.; Rui, Y. Magnetic (Fe3O4) nanoparticles reduce heavy metals uptake and mitigate their toxicity in wheat seedling. Sustainability 2017, 9, 790. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  94. Rizwan, M.; Ali, S.; Ur Rehman, M.Z.; Malik, S.; Adrees, M.; Qayyum, M.F.; Alamri, S.A.; Alyemeni, M.N.; Ahmad, P. Effect of foliar applications of silicon and titanium dioxide nanoparticles on growth oxidative stress and cadmium accumulation by rice (Oryza sativa). Acta Physiol. Plant 2019, 41, 35. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  95. Malar, S.; Manikandan, R.; Favas, P.J.; Sahi, S.V.; Venkatachalam, P. Effect of lead on phytotoxicity growth biochemical alterations and its role on genomic template stability in Sesbania grandiflora, a potential plant for phytoremediation. Ecotoxicol. Environ. Saf. 2014, 108, 249–257. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  96. Marzec, Z.; Schlegel-Zawadzka, M. Exposure to cadmium lead and mercury in the adult population from Eastern Poland 1990–2002. Food Addit. Contam. 2004, 21, 963–970. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  97. Kikuchi, T.; Okazaki, M.; Kimura, S.D.; Motobayashi, T.; Baasansuren, J.; Hattori, T.; Abe, T. Suppressive effects of magnesium oxide materials on cadmium uptake and accumulation into rice grains, II, Suppression of cadmium uptake and accumulation into rice grains due to application of magnesium oxide materials. J. Hazard. Mater. 2008, 154, 294–299. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  98. Wang, H.; Zhong, G.; Shi, G.; Pan, F. Toxicity of Cu, Pb, and Zn on Seed Germination and Young Seedlings of Wheat (Triticum aestivum L.). In Proceedings of the International Conference on Computer and Computing Technologies in Agriculture, Nanchang, China, 22–25 October 2010; Li, D.L., Liu, Y., Chen, Y.Y., Eds.; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2010; pp. 231–240. [Google Scholar]
  99. Shaikh, I.R.; Shaikh, P.R.; Shaikh, R.A.; Shaikh, A.A. Phytotoxic effects of heavy metals (Cr, Cd, Mn and Zn) on wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) seed germination and seedlings growth in black cotton soil of Nanded, India. Res. J. Chem. Sci. 2013, 3, 14–23. [Google Scholar]
  100. Faizan, M.; Faraz, A.; Yusuf, M.; Khan, S.T.; Hayat, S. Zinc oxide nanoparticle-mediated changes in photosynthetic efficiency and antioxidant system of tomato plants. Photosynthetica 2018, 56, 678–686. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  101. Faraz, A.; Faizan, M.; Hayat, S. Effects of Copper Oxide Nanoparticles on then Photosynthesis and Antioxidant levels of Mustard Plants (Brassica juncea). J. Biol. Chem. Res. 2018, 35, 418–426. [Google Scholar]
  102. Yasmeen, F.; Razzaq, A.; Iqbal, M.N.; Jhanzab, H.M. Effect of silver copper and iron nanoparticles on wheat germination. Int. J. Biosci. 2015, 6, 112–117. [Google Scholar]
  103. Jaberzadeh, A.; Moaveni, P.; Moghadam, H.R.T.; 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. Not. Bot. Horti. Agrobo. 2013, 41, 201–207. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  104. Zhang, W.; Long, J.; Geng, J.; Li, J.; Wei, Z. Impact of titanium dioxide nanoparticles on Cd phytotoxicity and bioaccumulation in rice (Oryza sativa L.). Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17, 2979. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  105. Ji, Y.; Zhou, Y.; Ma, C.; Feng, Y.; Hao, Y.; Rui, Y.; Wu, W.; Gui, X.; Han, Y.; Wang, Y.; et al. Jointed toxicity of TiO2 NPs and Cd to rice seedlings, NPs alleviated Cd toxicity and Cd promoted NPs uptake. Plant Physiol. Biochem. 2017, 110, 82–93. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  106. Aghdam, M.T.B.; 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. Braz. J. Bot. 2016, 39, 139–146. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  107. Kiapour, H.; Moaveni, P.; Habibi, D.; Sani, B. Evaluation of the application of gibbrellic acid and titanium dioxide nanoparticles under drought stress on some traits of basil (Ocimum basilicum L.). Int. J. Agron. Agric. Res. 2015, 6, 138–150. [Google Scholar]
  108. Haghighi, M.; Pessarakli, M. Influence of silicon and nano-silicon on salinity tolerance of cherry tomatoes (Solanum lycopersicum L.) at early growth stage. Sci. Hortic. 2013, 161, 111–117. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  109. Kalteh, M.; Alipour, Z.T.; Ashraf, S.; Aliabadi, M.M.; Nosratabadi, A.F. Effect of silica Nanoparticles on Basil (Ocimum basilicum) Under Salinity Stress. J. Chem. Health Risks 2014, 4, 49–55. [Google Scholar]
  110. Sabaghnia, N.; Janmohammadi, M. Effect of nano-silicon particles application on salinity tolerance in early growth of some lentil genotypes/Wpływ nanocząstek krzemionki na tolerancję zasolenia we wczesnym rozwoju niektórych genotypów soczewicy. Ann. UMCS Biol. 2015, 69, 39. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  111. Siddiqui, M.H.; Al-Whaibi, M.H. Role of nano-SiO2 in germination of tomato (Lycopersicum esculentum seeds Mill.). Saudi Biol. Sci. 2014, 21, 13–17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  112. Soliman, A.S.; El-feky, S.A.; Darwish, E. Alleviation of salt stress on Moringa peregrina using foliar application of nanofertilizers. J. Hort. Forest. 2015, 7, 36–47. [Google Scholar]
  113. Torabian, S.; Zahedi, M.; Khoshgoftarmanesh, A. Effect of Foliar Spray of Zinc Oxide on Some Antioxidant Enzymes Activity of Sunflower under Salt Stress. J. Agric. Sci. Technol. 2016, 18, 1013–1025. [Google Scholar]
  114. Hussein, M.M.; Abou-Baker, N.H. The contribution of nano-zinc to alleviate salinity stress on cotton plants. R. Soc. Open Sci. 2018, 5, 171809. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  115. Mahmoodzadeh, H.; Nabavi, M.; Kashefi, H. Effect of nanoscale titanium dioxide particles on the germination and growth of canola (Brassica napus). J. Ornament. Hortic. Plants 2013, 3, 25–32. [Google Scholar]
  116. Dimpka, C.O.; Singh, U.; Bindraban, P.S.; Elmer, W.H.; Gardea-Torresdey, J.L.; White, J.C. Zinc oxide nanoparticles alleviate drought-induced alterations in sorghum performance nutrient acquisition and grain fortification. Sci. Tot. Environ. 2019, 20, 926–934. [Google Scholar]
  117. Nedelkoska, T.V.; Doran, P.M. Characteristics of metal uptake by plants species with potential for phytoremediation and phytomining. Miner. Eng. 2000, 13, 549–561. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  118. Ngomsik, A.F.; Bee, A.; Draye, M.; Cote, G.; Cabuil, V. Magnetic nano- and microparticles for metal removal and environmental applications, a review. C. R. Chim. 2005, 8, 963–970. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  119. Dickinson, M.; Scott, T.B. The application of zero-valent iron nanoparticles for the remediation of a uranium-contaminated waste effluent. J Hazard. Mater. 2010, 178, 171–179. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  120. Cui, J.; Liu, T.; Li, F.; Yi, J.; Liu, C.; Yu, H. Silica nanoparticles alleviate cadmium toxicity in rice cells, mechanisms and size effects. Environ. Pollut. 2017, 228, 363–369. [Google Scholar]
  121. Wang, F.; Wang, M.; Liu, Z.; Han, T.; Ye, Y.; Gong, N.; Sun, J.; Zhu, C. Different responses of low grain-Cd-accumulating and high grain-Cd-accumulating rice cultivars to Cd stress. Plant Physiol. Biochem. 2015, 96, 261–269. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  122. Liu, C.; Li, F.; Luo, C.; Liu, X.; Wang, S.; Liu, T.; Li, X. Foliar application of two silica sols reduced cadmium accumulation in rice grains. J. Hazard. Mat. 2009, 161, 1466–1472. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  123. Venkatachalam, P.; Jayaraj, M.; Manikandan, R.; Geetha, N.; Rene, E.R.; Sharma, N.C.; Sahi, S.V. Zinc oxide nanoparticles (ZnO NPs) alleviate heavy metal-induced toxicity in Leucaena leucocephala seedlings, a physiochemical analysis. Plant Physiol. Biochem. 2017, 110, 59–69. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  124. Faizan, M.; Faraz, A.; Mir, A.R.; Hayat, S. Role of Zinc Oxide Nanoparticles in Countering Negative Effects Generated by Cadmium in Lycopersicon esculentum. J. Plant Growth Regul. 2020, 40, 101–115. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  125. Li, Z.; Huang, J. Effects of nanoparticle hydroxyapatite on growth and antioxidant system in pakchoi (Brassica chinensis L.) from cadmium-contaminated soil. J. Nanomater. 2014, 2014, 470962. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  126. Park, C.M.; Wang, D.; Han, J.; Heo, J.; Su, C. Evaluation of the colloidal stability and adsorption performance of reduced graphene oxide–elemental silver/magnetite nanohybrids for selected toxic heavy metals in aqueous solutions. Appl. Surf. Sci. 2019, 471, 8–17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Figure 1. Diagrammatic representation of heavy metal effects on plant growth and development.
Figure 1. Diagrammatic representation of heavy metal effects on plant growth and development.
Sustainability 15 01446 g001
Figure 2. The multiple functions of nanoparticles alleviate heavy metal stress in plants.
Figure 2. The multiple functions of nanoparticles alleviate heavy metal stress in plants.
Sustainability 15 01446 g002
Table 1. Impacts of nanoparticles on plants.
Table 1. Impacts of nanoparticles on plants.
NanoparticlesTest CropEffect of NanoparticlesReference
ZnOCyamopsis tetragonoloba (Cluster bean)Significant increase in chlorophyll content, leaf protein, and alkaline phosphate[12]
Vigna radiataEnhanced germination and growth[13]
Arachis hypogaeaIncreased seed germination rate[14]
Cicer arientumEnhanced weight of the plant[15]
Glycine maxIncreased root growth and development[16]
CeO2Glycine maxEnhancement in plant growth and development[17]
Triticum aestivumEnhanced shoot growth, biomass, grain yield[18]
Zea maysIncreased stem and root growth [16]
SorghumEnhanced assimilation rates of carbon in leaf and seed yield[19]
Allium cepaImproved growth, yield, and nutrient content[20]
AgLolium multifoliumEnhanced plant growth and development[21]
Eruca sativaIncreased root length[21]
Zea maysIncreased root length[22]
Oryza sativaEnhanced root length[23]
SiO2Lycopersicum esculentumIncreased seed germination[24]
Al2O3Triticum aestivumEnhanced root growth[25]
Glycine maxImproved survival and growth[26]
Zea maysRoot length augmented[27]
Glycine maxSignificant enhancement in root length[28]
Raphanus sativusImproved root growth[27]
TiO2Triticum aestivumIncreased root length[29]
RosaEnhanced plant resistance to infection of fungi by changing endogenous hormonal content[30]
Spinacia oleraceaEnhanced growth[31]
Lemna minorImproved the activities of CAT, SOD, and POX by eliminating accumulated ROS in plant [32]
Cicer arietinumAltered redox status[33]
Spinacia oleraceaDry weight and chlorophyll level increased[34]
Spinacia oleraceaIncreased fresh and dry biomass[31]
Spinacia oleraceaImproved light absorbance and carbon dioxide assimilation[35]
Fe/Fe2O3Citrullus lanatusEnhanced the activity of root, POX, SOD[36]
Triticum aestivumEnhanced seed germination rate and plant growth[37]
Triticum aestivumIncreased shoot and root biomass[26]
CAT: Catalase; POX: Peroxidase; SOD: Superoxide dismutase.
Table 2. Impacts of nanoparticles to alleviating abiotic stresses in plants.
Table 2. Impacts of nanoparticles to alleviating abiotic stresses in plants.
NanoparticlesTest CropEffect of NanoparticlesReference
TiO2Triticum aestivum L.Altered growth, yield, and starch level in drought stress[103]
Oryza sativa LAltered Cd migration in the soil–rice system in Cd toxicity[104]
Oryza sativa L.NPs decreased the Cd uptake in Cd toxicity[105]
Linum usitatissimum L.Altered length, biomass, yield, and carotenoid level in drought stress [106]
Oryza sativa L.Mitigated Cd toxicity by improving antioxidant enzymes activity[94]
Ocimum basilicum L.Reduced toxicity caused by drought stress[107]
SiO2Lycopersicum esculentum L.Reduced salinity stress and enhanced seed germination potential, root length, and dry weight[24]
Solanum lycopersicum L.Altered weight and photosynthetic attributes under salinity stress[108]
Ocimum basilicum L.Ameliorated salt stress and increased fresh and dry weight, chlorophyll content, and proline content[109]
Lens culinaris MedikAltered seed germination rate and plant growth under salinity stress[110]
Cucurbita pepo L.Increased activities of CAT, POX, and SOD[111]
ZnOMoringa peregrinaDecreased salt stress and reduction in Na+ and Cl contents[112]
Helianthus annuus L.Reduced salinity stress, increasing net CO2 assimilation rate[113]
Gossypium barbadense L.Increased growth, yield, and mineral contents in salinity stress[114]
Helianthus annuus L.Reduced salinity stress, increased plant growth, net CO2 assimilation[113]
Glycine maxMitigate drought stress and increasing seed germination rate[115]
Sorghum bicolorEnhanced drought tolerance, accelerated plant development and promoted yield[116]
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Faizan, M.; Alam, P.; Rajput, V.D.; Faraz, A.; Afzal, S.; Ahmed, S.M.; Yu, F.-Y.; Minkina, T.; Hayat, S. Nanoparticle Mediated Plant Tolerance to Heavy Metal Stress: What We Know? Sustainability 2023, 15, 1446. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15021446

AMA Style

Faizan M, Alam P, Rajput VD, Faraz A, Afzal S, Ahmed SM, Yu F-Y, Minkina T, Hayat S. Nanoparticle Mediated Plant Tolerance to Heavy Metal Stress: What We Know? Sustainability. 2023; 15(2):1446. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15021446

Chicago/Turabian Style

Faizan, Mohammad, Pravej Alam, Vishnu D. Rajput, Ahmad Faraz, Shadma Afzal, S. Maqbool Ahmed, Fang-Yuan Yu, Tatiana Minkina, and Shamsul Hayat. 2023. "Nanoparticle Mediated Plant Tolerance to Heavy Metal Stress: What We Know?" Sustainability 15, no. 2: 1446. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15021446

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop