Skip to main navigation menu Skip to main content Skip to site footer
Plant Science Today (PST)

Review Articles

Vol. 13 No. sp9 (2026): Recent Advances in Agriculture

Mitigating abiotic stress in crop plants using nanoformulations for climate-resilient agriculture

DOI
https://doi.org/10.14719/pst.16254
Submitted
22 June 2026
Published
04-11-2026

Abstract

Abiotic stresses, particularly drought, salinity, heat and heavy metal toxicity, increasingly constrain crop productivity and threaten sustainable food production. Although nanoformulations have demonstrated considerable potential for stress mitigation, the evidence remains fragmented across nanoparticle types, crops, stress conditions and application doses and a critical synthesis linking dose response, underlying mechanisms, multi-omics evidence, field performance and safety is still lacking. This review critically synthesises advances in nanoformulations for abiotic stress management, emphasising dose-dependent responses, physiological and biochemical mechanisms, molecular regulation, multi-omics insights, environmental implications and agricultural applications. Nanoformulations are broadly categorised into metal and metal-oxide, silicon-based, carbon-based, biopolymeric and composite or smart systems to provide a focused assessment of their functional roles. Their stressalleviating effects are primarily associated with enhanced antioxidant defence, osmotic adjustment, photosynthetic protection, ion homeostasis, nutrient utilisation and stress responsive signalling. Quantitative evidence highlights their potential; for example, foliar application of zinc oxide nanoparticles (ZnO NPs) at 100 mg L-1 increased grain yield by 42.2 % and root dry weight by 63.1 % in salt-stressed wheat under experimental conditions. Multi-omics approaches integrating transcriptomics, proteomics, metabolomics and ionomics are increasingly revealing NP–plant interactions and stress-response networks. Their convergence with artificial intelligence (AI)-assisted precision agriculture could further support prediction of stress responses and optimisation of nanoformulation dose, timing and crop-specific application. However, dose standardisation, multi-season and multi-location field validation, NP transformation and persistence, soil microbiome effects, food-chain transfer and harmonised safety assessment remain major challenges. Future research should integrate smart nanoformulations, multi-omics and AI-driven precision deployment with rigorous field and environmental safety validation. Nanoformulations therefore represent a next-generation strategy for precise, sustainable and climate-resilient agriculture.

References

  1. 1. Oyebamiji YO, Adigun BA, Shamsudin NAA, Ikmal AM, Salisu MA, Malike FA, et al. Recent advancements in mitigating abiotic stresses in crops. Horticulturae. 2024;10(2):156. https://doi.org/10.3390/horticulturae10020156
  2. 2. Rengasamy P. Soil salinization. Oxford Bibliographies in Environmental Science. 2014. https://doi.org/10.1093/obo/9780199363445-0008
  3. 3. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. Environmental considerations in irrigation development. Rome: FAO; 1997.
  4. 4. Mickelbart MV, Hasegawa PM, Bailey-Serres J. Genetic mechanisms of abiotic stress tolerance that translate to crop yield stability. Nat Rev Genet. 2015;16(4):237–51. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrg3901
  5. 5. Khan I, Raza MA, Awan SA, Bilal M, Rizwan M, Ali S. Amelioration of heat stress in tomato using titanium dioxide nanoparticles. Agronomy. 2024;14(2):280.
  6. 6. Ahmed T, Noman M, Manzoor N, Shahid M, Abdullah M, Ali L, et al. Nanoparticle-based amelioration of drought stress and cadmium toxicity in rice via triggering the stress responsive genetic mechanisms and nutrient acquisition. Ecotoxicol Environ Saf. 2021;209:111829. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoenv.2020.111829
  7. 7. Khodakovskaya MV, de Silva K, Biris AS, Dervishi E, Villagarcia H. Carbon nanotubes induce growth enhancement of tobacco cells. ACS Nano. 2012;6(3):2128–35. https://doi.org/10.1021/nn204643g
  8. 8. Faizan M, Bhat JA, Noureldeen A, Ahmad P, Hayat S. Zinc oxide nanoparticles-induced growth, photosynthesis and antioxidant responses in salt-stressed tomato and their interaction with soil microbiome. Sci Hortic. 2021;280:109902.
  9. 9. Seleiman MF, Al-Selwey WA, Ibrahim AA, Shady M, Alsadon AA. Foliar applications of ZnO and SiO2 nanoparticles mitigate water deficit and enhance potato yield and quality traits. Agronomy. 2023;13(2):466. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy13020466
  10. 10. Petrov VD, Van Breusegem F. Hydrogen peroxide - a central hub for information flow in plant cells. AoB Plants. 2012;2012. https://doi.org/10.1093/aobpla/pls014
  11. 11. Iqbal M, Raja NI, Mashwani ZU, Hussain M, Ejaz M, Yasmeen F. Effect of silver nanoparticles on growth of wheat under heat stress. Iran J Sci Technol Trans Sci. 2019;43:387–95. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40995-017-0417-4
  12. 12. Rodriguez E, Azevedo R, Fernandes P, Santos C. Copper nanoparticle uptake and toxicity in lettuce: impact on photosynthesis and mineral nutrition. Environ Monit Assess. 2020;192(4):260.
  13. 13. Shahid M, Farah MA, Al-Anazi KM, Koolman L. Zinc-based amendments and Zn-solubilizing beneficial bacteria mitigate lead-induced toxicity in chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.). Front Microbiol.2025;16:1718122. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2025.1718122
  14. 14. Adil M, Bashir S, Bashir S, Aslam Z, Ahmad N, Younas T, et al. Zinc oxide nanoparticles improved chlorophyll contents, physical parameters and wheat yield under salt stress. Front Plant Sci. 2022;13:932861. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2022.932861
  15. 15. Hanif M, Munir N, Abideen Z, Yong JWH, El-Keblawy A, El-Sheikh MA. Synthesis and optimizations of nanoparticles from Phragmites karka improves tomato growth and salinity resilience. Biocatal Agric Biotechnol. 2023;55:102972. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bcab.2023.102972
  16. 16. Qi M, Liu Y, Li T. Nano-TiO2 improve the photosynthesis of tomato leaves under mild heat stress. Biol Trace Elem Res. 2013;156(1–3):323–8. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12011-013-9833-2
  17. 17. Rossi L, Zhang W, Ma X. Cerium oxide nanoparticles alter the antioxidant capacity and photosynthetic performance of soybean grown under drought stress. Environ Pollut. 2016;219:28–36. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2016.09.060
  18. 18. Aslam A, Noreen Z, Rashid M, Aslam M, Hussain T, Younas A, et al. Understanding the role of magnetic (Fe3O4) nanoparticles to mitigate cadmium stress in radish (Raphanus sativus L.). Bot Stud. 2024;65(1):17. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40529-024-00420-4
  19. 19. Siddiqui MH, Al-Whaibi MH. Role of nano-SiO2 in germination of tomato. Saudi J Biol Sci. 2014;21(1):13–17. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sjbs.2013.04.005
  20. 20. Torney F, Trewyn BG, Lin VSY, Wang K. Mesoporous silica nanoparticles deliver DNA and chemicals into plants. Nat Nanotechnol.2007;2(5):295–300. https://doi.org/10.1038/nnano.2007.108
  21. 21. Lahiani MH, Dervishi E, Chen J, Nima Z, Gaume A, Biris AS, et al. Impact of carbon nanotube exposure to seeds of valuable crops. ACS Appl Mater Interfaces. 2013;5(16):7965–73. https://doi.org/10.1021/am402052x
  22. 22. Cañas JE, Long M, Nations S, Vadan R, Dai L, Luo M, et al. Effects of functionalized and nonfunctionalized single-walled carbon nanotubes on root elongation of select crop species. Environ Toxicol Chem. 2008;27(9):1922–31. https://doi.org/10.1897/08-117.1
  23. 23. 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. Sci Total Environ. 2019;667:485–99. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019.02.409
  24. 24. Al Hinai MS, Ullah A, Al-Toubi AKM, Al Harrasi IR, Alamri AA, Farooq M. Co-application of biochar and seed priming with nano-sized chitosan-proline improves salt tolerance in bread wheat. J Soil Sci Plant Nutr. 2023;23:3058–73. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42729-023-01276-6
  25. 25. Moosavi SNV, Saadatmand S, Jamei R, Darvishzadeh R. Chitosan nanoparticles conferred salinity tolerance in maize by upregulating E3 ubiquitin-protein ligase, P5CS1, HKT1, NHX1 and PMP3 genes. Environ Sci Pollut Res. 2024;31:61210–19. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-024-34933-z
  26. 26. Akhtar N, Ilyas N, Hayat R, Yasmin H, Noureldeen A, Ahmad P, et al. Synergistic effects of plant growth promoting rhizobacteria and silicon dioxide nanoparticles for amelioration of drought stress in wheat. Plant Physiol Biochem.2021;166:160–76. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.plaphy.2021.05.039
  27. 27. Fraceto LF, Grillo R, de Medeiros GA, Scognamiglio V, Rea G, Bartolucci C. Nanotechnology in agriculture: which innovation potential does it have? Front Environ Sci. 2016;4:20. https://doi.org/10.3389/fenvs.2016.00020
  28. 28. Dimkpa CO, Bindraban PS. Nanofertilizers: new products for the industry? J Agric Food Chem. 2018;66(26):6462–73. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jafc.7b02150
  29. 29. Behboudi F, Tahmasebi-Sarvestani Z, Kassaee MZ, Modarres-Sanavy SAM, Sorooshzadeh A, Mokhtassi-Bidgoli A. Evaluation of chitosan nanoparticles effects with two application methods on wheat under drought stress. J Plant Nutr. 2019;42(13):1439–51. https://doi.org/10.1080/01904167.2019.1617308
  30. 30. Sheikhalipour M, Esmaielpour B, Gohari G, Haghighi M, Jafari H, Farhadi H, et al. Salt stress mitigation via the foliar application of chitosan functionalized selenium and anatase titanium dioxide nanoparticles in Stevia rebaudiana Bertoni. Molecules.2021;26:4090. https://doi.org/10.3390/molecules26134090
  31. 31. Khan ZS, Rizwan M, Hafeez M, Ali S, Adrees M, Qayyum MF, et al. Effects of silicon nanoparticles on growth and physiology of wheat in cadmium contaminated soil under different soil moisture levels. Environ Sci Pollut Res. 2020;27:4958–68. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-019-06673-y
  32. 32. Thind S, Hussain I, Ali S, Rasheed R, Ashraf MA. Silicon application modulates growth, physio-chemicals and antioxidants in wheat exposed to different cadmium regimes. Dose Response. 2021;19(2):15593258211014646. https://doi.org/10.1177/15593258211014646
  33. 33. 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. https://doi.org/10.3390/plants10020421
  34. 34. El-Zohri M, Al-Wadaani NA, Bafeel SO. Foliar sprayed green zinc oxide nanoparticles mitigate drought-induced oxidative stress in tomato. Plants. 2021;10(11):2400. https://doi.org/10.3390/plants10112400
  35. 35. Sun L, Song F, Guo J, Zhu X, Liu S, Liu F, et al. Nano-ZnO-induced drought tolerance is associated with melatonin synthesis and metabolism in maize. Int J Mol Sci. 2020;21(3):782. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms21030782
  36. 36. Anwar T, Qureshi H, Fatimah H, Siddiqi EH, Anwaar S, Moussa IM, et al. Elucidating effect of ZnO-nanoparticles and melatonin on physiological adjustments and growth of Solanum melongena under salinity stress. Sci Hortic. 2023;322:112455. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scienta.2023.112455
  37. 37. Song Y, Jiang M, Zhang H, Li R. Zinc oxide nanoparticles alleviate chilling stress in rice (Oryza sativa L.) by regulating antioxidative system and chilling response transcription factors. Molecules. 2021;26(8):2196. https://doi.org/10.3390/molecules26082196
  38. 38. Ishtiaq M, Mazhar MW, Maqbool M, Hussain T, Hussain SA, Casini R, et al. Seed priming with selenium nanoparticles maintains the redox status in water stressed tomato plants by modulating the antioxidant defense enzymes. Plants. 2023;12(7):1556. https://doi.org/10.3390/plants12071556
  39. 39. Yosefi A, Mozafari AA, Javadi T. In vitro assessment of strawberry plant responses to water shortage stress under nano-iron application. In Vitro Cell Dev Biol Plant. 2022;58(4):499–510. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11627-022-10255-y
  40. 40. Khan I, Awan SA, Rizwan M, Akram MA, Zia-Ur-Rehman M, Wang X, et al. Physiological and transcriptome analyses demonstrate silver nanoparticles mediated alleviation of salt stress in pearl millet (Pennisetum glaucum L.). Environ Pollut. 2023;318:120863. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2022.120863
  41. 41. Nair R, Varghese SH, Nair BG, Maekawa T, Yoshida Y, Kumar DS. Nanoparticulate material delivery to plants. Plant Sci.2010;179(3):154–63. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.plantsci.2010.04.012
  42. 42. Corredor E, Testillano PS, Coronado MJ, González-Melendi P, Fernández-Pacheco R, Marquina C, et al. Nanoparticle penetration and transport in living pumpkin plants: in situ subcellular identification. BMC Plant Biol. 2009;9:45. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2229-9-45
  43. 43. Zhu H, Han J, Xiao JQ, Jin Y. Uptake, translocation and accumulation of manufactured iron oxide nanoparticles by pumpkin plants. J Environ Monit. 2008;10(6):713–7. https://doi.org/10.1039/b805998e
  44. 44. Faizan M, Faraz A, Yusuf M, Khan ST, Hayat S. Biogenic nanoparticles and their role in plant stress tolerance: synthesis, mechanisms and applications. Nanomaterials. 2023;13(6):974. https://doi.org/10.3390/nano13060974
  45. 45. Lin D, Xing B. Root uptake and phytotoxicity of ZnO nanoparticles. Environ Sci Technol. 2008;42(14):5580–85. https://doi.org/10.1021/es800422x
  46. 46. Serag MF, Kaji N, Gaillard C, Okamoto Y, Terasaka K, Jabasini M, et al. Trafficking and subcellular localization of multiwalled carbon nanotubes in plant cells. ACS Nano. 2011;5(1):493–99. https://doi.org/10.1021/nn102344t
  47. 47. Servin A, Elmer W, Mukherjee A, de la Torre-Roche R, Hamdi H, White JC, et al. A review of the use of engineered nanomaterials to suppress plant disease and enhance crop yield. J Nanopart Res. 2015;17:92. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11051-015-2907-7
  48. 48. Birbaum K, Brogioli R, Schellenberg M, Martinoia E, Stark WJ, Günther D, et al. No evidence for cerium dioxide nanoparticle translocation in maize plants. Environ Sci Technol.2010;44(22):8718–23. https://doi.org/10.1021/es101685f
  49. 49. Zhao L, Peng B, Hernandez-Viezcas JA, Rico CM, Sun Y, Peralta-Videa JR, et al. Stress response and tolerance of Zea mays to CeO2 nanoparticles: cross talk among H2O2, heat shock protein and lipid peroxidation. ACS Nano. 2012;6(11):9615–22. https://doi.org/10.1021/nn302975u
  50. 50. Foley JA, Ramankutty N, Brauman KA, Cassidy ES, Gerber JS, Johnston M, et al. Solutions for a cultivated planet. Nature.2011;478(7369):337–42. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature10452
  51. 51. Dietz KJ, Herth S. Plant nanotoxicology. Trends Plant Sci. 2011;16(11):582–89. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tplants.2011.08.003
  52. 52. Chhipa H. Nanofertilizers and nanopesticides for agriculture. Environ Chem Lett. 2017;15:15–22. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10311-016-0600-4
  53. 53. Timmusk S, Seisenbaeva G, Behers L. Titania (TiO2) nanoparticles enhance the performance of growth-promoting rhizobacteria. Sci Rep. 2018;8(1):617. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-017-18939-x
  54. 54. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. Guidance document on the testing of nanomaterials: ecotoxicological test methods. OECD Series on Testing and Assessment No. 317. 2023.
  55. 55. Mittler R. ROS are good. Trends Plant Sci. 2017;22(1):11–19. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tplants.2016.08.002
  56. 56. Gill SS, Tuteja N. Reactive oxygen species and antioxidant machinery in abiotic stress tolerance in crop plants. Plant Physiol Biochem. 2010;48(12):909–30. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.plaphy.2010.08.016
  57. 57. Noctor G, Foyer CH. Ascorbate and glutathione: keeping active oxygen under control. Annu Rev Plant Biol. 1998;49(1):249–79. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.arplant.49.1.249
  58. 58. Hasanuzzaman M, Bhuyan MB, Zulfiqar F, Raza A, Mohsin SM, Mahmud JA, et al. Reactive oxygen species and antioxidant defense in plants under abiotic stress: revisiting the crucial role of a universal defense regulator. Antioxidants.2020;9(8):681. https://doi.org/10.3390/antiox9080681
  59. 59. Yadav B, Jogawat A, Rahman MS, Narayan OP. Secondary metabolites in the drought stress tolerance of crop plants. Gene Rep. 2021;23:101040. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.genrep.2021.101040
  60. 60. Gao F, Liu C, Qu C, Zheng L, Yang F, Su M, et al. Was improvement of spinach growth by nano-TiO2 treatment related to the changes of Rubisco activase? Biometals. 2008;21(2):211–17. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10534-007-9110-y
  61. 61. Liu R, Lal R. Potentials of engineered nanoparticles as fertilizers for increasing agronomic productions. Sci Total Environ.2015;514:131–39. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2015.01.104
  62. 62. Rui M, Ma C, Hao Y, Guo J, Rui Y, Tang X, et al. Iron oxide nanoparticles as a potential iron fertilizer for peanut (Arachis hypogaea). Front Plant Sci. 2016;7:815. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2016.00815
  63. 63. Fahad S, Hussain S, Matloob A, Khan FA, Khaliq A, Saud S, et al. Phytohormones and plant responses to salinity stress: a review. Plant Growth Regul. 2015;75(2):391–404. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10725-014-0013-y
  64. 64. Seleiman MF, Al-Suhaibani N, Ali N, Akmal M, Alotaibi M, Refay Y, et al. Drought stress impacts on plants and different approaches to alleviate its adverse effects. Plants. 2021;10(2):259. https://doi.org/10.3390/plants10020259
  65. 65. Lata C, Prasad M. Role of DREBs in regulation of abiotic stress responses in plants. J Exp Bot. 2011;62(14):4731–48. https://doi.org/10.1093/jxb/err210
  66. 66. Li W, Pang S, Lu Z, Jin B. Function and mechanism of WRKY transcription factors in abiotic stress responses of plants.Plants.2020;9(11):1515. https://doi.org/10.3390/plants9111515
  67. 67. Nuruzzaman M, Sharoni AM, Kikuchi S. Roles of NAC transcription factors in the regulation of biotic and abiotic stress responses in plants. Front Microbiol. 2013;4:248. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2013.00248
  68. 68. Baldoni E, Genga A, Cominelli E. Plant MYB transcription factors: their role in drought response mechanisms. Int J MolSci.2015;16(7):15811–51. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms160715811
  69. 69. Yuan P, Yang T, Poovaiah BW. Calcium signaling-mediated plant response to cold stress. Int J Mol Sci. 2018;19(12):3896. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms19123896
  70. 70. Balusamy SR, Joshi AS, Perumalsamy H, Mijakovic I, Singh P. Advancing sustainable agriculture: a critical review of smart and eco-friendly nanomaterial applications. J Nanobiotechnol.2023;21:384. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12951-023-02135-3
  71. 71. Kumari S, Khan S, Caulfield G, et al. Multi-omics approaches to study the response of crop plants to nanoparticle treatments. Front Plant Sci. 2023;14:1208218.
  72. 72. US Environmental Protection Agency. TSCA chemical substance inventory: nanomaterials. US EPA; 2023.
  73. 73. Gill SS, et al. Rice straw based silicon nanoparticles improve morphological and nutrient profile of rice plants under salinity stress by triggering physiological and genetic repair mechanisms. Plant Physiol Biochem. 2023;201:107788. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.plaphy.2023.107788
  74. 74. Sarkar MM, Mukherjee S, Mathur P, Roy S. Exogenous nano-silicon application improves ion homeostasis, osmolyte accumulation and palliates oxidative stress in Lens culinaris under NaCl stress. Plant Physiol Biochem. 2022;192:143–61. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.plaphy.2022.10.001
  75. 75. Mustafa H, Ilyas N, Akhtar N, Raja NI, Zainab T, Shah T, et al. Biosynthesis and characterization of titanium dioxide nanoparticles and its effects along with calcium phosphate on physicochemical attributes of wheat under drought stress. Ecotoxicol Environ Saf. 2021;223:112519. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoenv.2021.112519
  76. 76. Qazi SJ, Yasmin H, Farid U, Ahmad Z, Nosheen A, Sultan T, et al. Integrated TiO2 nanoparticles and Pseudomonas sp. GM5 lower tissue chromium concentrations and strengthen physiological resilience in wheat under chromium and drought stress. Biocatal Agric Biotechnol. 2026:104201. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bcab.2026.104201
  77. 77. López-Moreno ML, de la Rosa G, Hernández-Viezcas JÁ, Castillo-Michel H, Botez CE, Peralta-Videa JR, et al. Evidence of the differential biotransformation and genotoxicity of ZnO and CeO2 nanoparticles on soybean (Glycine max) plants. Environ Sci Technol. 2010;44(19):7315–20. https://doi.org/10.1021/es903891g
  78. 78. Albanese A, Tang PS, Chan WC. The effect of nanoparticle size, shape and surface chemistry on biological systems. Annu Rev Biomed Eng. 2012;14:1–16. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-bioeng-071811-150124
  79. 79. Wu H, Tito N, Giraldo JP. Anionic cerium oxide nanoparticles protect plant photosynthesis from abiotic stress by scavenging reactive oxygen species. ACS Nano. 2017;11(11):11283–97. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsnano.7b05723
  80. 80. Yin L, Cheng Y, Espinasse B, Colman BP, Auffan M, Wiesner M, et al. More than the ions: the effects of silver nanoparticles on Lolium multiflorum. Environ Sci Technol. 2011;45(6):2360–67. https://doi.org/10.1021/es103995x
  81. 81. Gohari G, Mohammadi A, Akbari A, Zareei E, Saadatmand S, Panahirad S, et al. Chitosan-magnesium oxide nanoparticles improve salinity tolerance in rice (Oryza sativa L.). ACS Appl Mater Interfaces. 2023;15(17):20649–60. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsami.3c00043
  82. 82. Omar AA, Heikal YM, Zayed EM, et al. Conferring of drought and heat stress tolerance in wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) genotypes and their response to selenium nanoparticles application. Nanomaterials. 2023;13(6):998. https://doi.org/10.3390/nano13060998
  83. 83. Gohari G, Mohammadi A, Akbari A, et al. Titanium dioxide nanoparticles (TiO2 NPs) promote growth and ameliorate salinity stress effects on essential oil profile and biochemical attributes of Dracocephalum moldavica. Sci Rep. 2020;10(1):912 https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-57794-1
  84. 84. Elshayb OM, Ahmad A, Iqbal J, et al. ZnO-nanoparticles and stage-based drought tolerance in wheat (Triticum aestivum L.): effect on morpho-physiology, nutrients uptake, grain yield and quality. Sci Rep. 2025;15:7894. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-025-89718-2
  85. 85. Verma KK, Zeng Y, Song XP, Singh M, Wu KC, Rajput VD, et al. Nanosilicon: an approach for abiotic stress mitigation and sustainable agriculture. Front Plant Sci. 2022;13:1021598. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2022.1025974
  86. 86. Zhao M, Zhang C, Xu M, Chen Y, Li Y, Zhang J, et al. Foliar carbon dots reprogram leaf redox metabolism and rhizosphere iron cycling to mitigate cadmium accumulation in field-grown rice. Carbon Res. 2026;5:32. https://doi.org/10.1007/s44246-026-00286-0
  87. 87. Hussain B, Yin X, Lin Q, Hamid Y, Usman M, Hashmi MLUR, et al. Mitigating cadmium exposure risk in rice with foliar nano-selenium: investigations through Caco-2 human cell line in-vivo bioavailability assay. Environ Pollut. 2024;356:124356. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2024.124356
  88. 88. Hafez EM, Osman HS, Gowayed SM, Okasha SA, Omara AE-D, Sami R, et al. Minimizing the adversely impacts of water deficit and soil salinity on maize growth and productivity in response to the application of plant growth-promoting rhizobacteria and silica nanoparticles. Agronomy. 2021;11(4):676. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy11040676
  89. 89. Government of India, Ministry of Chemicals and Fertilizers. Government making efforts to enhance the production of nano urea. New Delhi: Press Information Bureau; 2021.
  90. 90. Government of India, Ministry of Chemicals and Fertilizers. Government of India notifies Nano DAP under Fertilizer Control Order (FCO). New Delhi: Press Information Bureau; 2024.
  91. 91. Government of India, Ministry of Chemicals and Fertilizers. Government promotes the use of nano fertilizers amongst farmers. New Delhi: Press Information Bureau; 2025.
  92. 92. Department of Biotechnology, Government of India. Guidelines and standard operating procedures for the safety assessment of engineered nanomaterials. DBT; 2012.
  93. 93. Kumar N, Tripathi SC, Yadav DB, Samota SR, Venkatesh K, Sareen S, et al. Boosting wheat yield, profitability and NUE with prilled and nano urea in conservation tillage. Sci Rep. 2023;13:18176. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-44879-w
  94. 94. Upadhyay PK, Dey A, Singh VK, Dwivedi BS, Singh T, Rajanna GA, et al. Conjoint application of nano-urea with conventional fertilizers: an energy efficient and environmentally robust approach for sustainable crop production. PLoS One. 2023;18(7):e0284009. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0284009
  95. 95. Liverpool-Tasie LSO, Omonona BT, Sanou A, Ogunleye W. Is increasing inorganic fertilizer use for maize production in SSA a profitable proposition? Evidence from Nigeria. Food Policy.2017;67:41–51. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodpol.2016.09.011
  96. 96. Grand View Research. Nanotechnology in agriculture market size, share and trends analysis report, 2023-2030. San Francisco (CA): Grand View Research Inc.; 2023.
  97. 97. Yin L, Colman BP, McGill BM, Wright JP, Bernhardt ES. Effects of silver nanoparticle exposure on germination and early growth of eleven wetland plants. PLoS One. 2012;7(10):e47674. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0047674
  98. 98. Hu CW, Li M, Cui YB, Li DS, Chen J, Yang LY. Toxicological effects of TiO2 and ZnO nanoparticles in soil on earthworm Eisenia fetida. Soil Biol Biochem. 2010;42(4):586–91. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soilbio.2009.12.007
  99. 99. Heinlaan M, Ivask A, Blinova I, Dubourguier HC, Kahru A. Toxicity of nanosized and bulk ZnO, CuO and TiO2 to bacteria, yeasts, algae, crustaceans and mammalian cells in vitro. Chemosphere. 2008;71(7):1308–16. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2007.11.047
  100. 100. EFSA Scientific Committee. Guidance on risk assessment of the application of nanoscience and nanotechnologies in the food and feed chain: Part 1, human and animal health. EFSA J. 2018;16(7):e05327. https://doi.org/10.2903/j.efsa.2018.5327

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.