Nano-Agrochemicals: Comparison
View Latest Version
Please note this is a comparison between Version 2 by Catherine Yang and Version 1 by Shehbaz Ali.

Nano-agrochemicals (NACs) are nanomaterials and formulations specifically designed and controlled at the nanoscale. They can be defined as agricultural formulations in the form of nanopesticides (NPCs) which have unique properties (high aspect ratio) due to elements ranging in nanometer size (up to 100 nm). They have the potential to revolutionize agriculture through the promotion of efficient and ecofriendly NPCs with properties such as target specificity, the ability to control usage, and high surface area which allow the targeted delivery of nutrients and protection of crop yields. NACs, or nanotechnology-based agrochemicals, have gained considerable attention in recent years due to extensive research and development efforts. These cutting-edge products harness the special qualities of NPs to improve the effectiveness, safety, and ecofriendliness of conventional agrochemicals. This technology has emerged as a valuable tool in the agricultural sector, offering novel and efficient solutions for conventional agricultural methods and practices. Some of these include NPCs, among other NACs, which have the capacity to revolutionize agriculture by enhancing sustainability and efficiency. These NPCs, ranging in size from 1 to 200 nm, serve as a vehicle to transport agrochemical ingredients (AcI). With unique properties, they outperform conventional pesticides by 31.5% in managing crop pathogens, weeds, and insects. These unique properties include enhanced water solubility, improved bioavailability, and increased protection of agrochemicals from environmental degradation. Thus, NPCs address the drawbacks of conventional pesticides such as limited availability, susceptibility to degradation from light, and the negative effects of organic solvent pollution.

  • agriculture
  • nanomaterials
  • herbicides
  • pesticides
  • plant disease

1. Types of Nanopesticides (NPCs)

NACs (such as NPCs) represent a remarkable advancement in contemporary agricultural practices. Nanostructures are used as carriers for agrochemical AIs [123][1]. The utilization of nanotechnology in agrochemicals effectively addresses the limitations associated with traditional agrochemicals, such as limited bioavailability, susceptibility to photolysis, and the potential for organic solvent pollution [13][2]. Researchers have conducted an extensive analysis of a large dataset consisting of 36,658 patents and 500 peer-reviewed journal articles, resulting in the identification of two prominent categories of NPCs. Type 1 NPCs consist of metals such as Ag, Cu, and Ti, while Type 2 NPCs involve the utilization of nanocarriers to encapsulate the AIs. These nanocarriers can be composed of various materials such as polymers, clays, and zein nanoparticles (NPs) [17][3].

1.1. Type 1: Metal-Based Nanopesticides (m-NPCs)

The m-NPCs use metallic nanoparticles as active ingredients, providing numerous advantages compared to conventional chemical pesticides [130][4]. They are smaller, usually between a few and 200 nm [17,131][3][5]. The presence of multiple active sites for the release of bioactive molecules, ion-exchanging properties, high adsorption ability, efficient surface chemistry, high thermo-stability, and exceptional electronic characteristics in nanotechnology have led to the development of m-NPCs [131,132][5][6]. In general, metal formulations are synthesized using metal clusters or ions as nucleation centers which are interconnected by organic ligands. Metal-based encapsulation exhibits advantageous properties such as high surface/volume ratio, voluminous pores, adjustable pore size, efficient surface chemistry, high thermo-stability, and multiple topologies [131][5]. These NPCs are effective against a wide range of pests and diseases, but they also have the potential to be toxic to non-target organisms. Recent studies have demonstrated that their utilization shows superior efficacy compared to their non-nanoscale analogues. This advancement has proven to be involved in augmenting agricultural productivity, ensuring the safety of food products, and enhancing their nutritional content [17][3]. m-NPCs can act as pesticides by producing reactive oxygen species (ROS), releasing cations, damaging biomolecules, depleting ATP, and interacting with membranes [133][7]. A range of metallic and metallic oxide NPs have shown promising sustainable agriculture and antimicrobial applications in vitro against Gram-positive and -negative bacteria. Gold and silver NPs are useful for combating bacteria [15,134][8][9] and copper NPs can be used to treat fungal infections in plants [134,135][9][10] such as against pathogenic fungi Stachybotrys chartarum and Candida albicans [136][11]. The application of Ag NPs is their use as an antibiofilm coating. Additionally, these NPs have demonstrated antimicrobial properties against various microorganisms such as fungi and viruses, including SARS-CoV-2 [137][12]. Other metallic oxide NPs, like titanium dioxide (TiO2), zinc oxide (ZnO), and iron oxide (Fe2O3), have antimicrobial and fungicidal properties, making them useful for averting plant diseases [15][8]. ZnO-NPs have demonstrated enhanced efficacy against a range of microorganisms, including Bacillus subtilis, Bacillus megaterium, Staphylococcus aureus, Sarcina lutea, Escherichia coli, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, Klebsiella pneumonia, Pseudomonas vulgaris, Candida albicans, and Aspergillus niger [138][13]. Green synthesis of ZnO-NPs led to several morphological and histological abnormalities in Ae. Aegypti third instar larvae [122][14]. Some of the different types of m-NPCs are summarized in Table 31.

1.2. Type 2: Nanocarrier-Based Nanopesticides (nc-NPCs)

The nc-NPCs represent a category of NPCs wherein AIs are encapsulated within nanocarriers. The AIs in this type are mainly conventional pesticides, such as atrazine, avermectin, and glyphosate. Nanocarriers can be composed of diverse materials, such as polymers, lipids, and proteins. The utilization of nanocarriers in NPCs presents numerous benefits, such as enhanced solubility, stability, and regulated release of AIs. The application of these agents may enhance the efficacy of NPCs by improving their capacity for permeability and absorption into plant tissues. Therefore, they have demonstrated enhanced action and efficacy of AIs in comparison to conventional formulations, owing to their diminutive dimensions and substantial surface area [17,131][3][5]. Recent advancements in biopolymer modification have enabled enhanced control over nanocarriers’ characteristics and their interactions with cargoes and plant tissues. Lignocellulosic-based nanocarriers offer a promising platform for the development of environmentally friendly NPCs due to their non-toxic and biodegradable nature. Tannins and β-glucan are also being studied as potential nanocarriers for AIs [139][15]. It has been reported that the tobacco mild green mosaic virus (TMGMV) and other plant viruses can act as nanocarriers for AIs to effectively deliver pesticides to target cells [140,141][16][17]. NPCs utilizing nanocarriers possess certain advantages; however, concerns and challenges persist regarding their application. Thorough evaluation of the risks and potential harm to people and the environment is necessary [142][18]. Different types of nanocarriers which have been used to encapsulate AIs (type 2 NPCs) are shown in Figure 51.
Table 31.
A summary of the composition, effectiveness, and ecological risks of NACs in agriculture.
Nanopesticide Type Composition Effectiveness Ecological Risk References
Metal-based nanopesticides
Silver Silver nanoparticles (AgNPs) Utilized in diverse agricultural situations owing to their remarkable antimicrobial attributes. AgNPs induce oxidative stress in plants and bioaccumulate across trophic levels, resulting in significant toxicity. They are extremely toxic to aquatic organisms. [143][19]
Copper Copper-based nanomaterials (Cu-based NMs) including Cu, Cu (I), and Cu (II)-based NMs Promising alternative to highly active fungicides. Excessive use of copper-based fertilizers and pesticides poses environmental risks. Cu-based nanomaterials are toxic in aquatic systems. [144][20]
Zinc Zinc oxide nanoparticles (ZnO-NPs) Promising antibacterial, antifungal, and antiviral properties. Harm fish and other aquatic organisms. They can cause harmful effects on genes, mutations, or cells. [145][21]
Iron Iron-based nanoparticles Utilized as an insecticide in pest management. Insufficient consideration of environmental and human health risks in the research. [146][22]
Titanium Titanium dioxide nanoparticles (TiO2 NPs) Used in various industries due to their high photocatalytic activity. Adverse impacts on aquatic ecosystems. [147][23]
Aluminium Nanostructured alumina Utilized as an insecticide in pest management. Insufficient consideration of environmental and human health risks in the research. [146][22]
Silica NPs (Silicon Dioxide NPs, SiO2-NPs)
Solid and Nonporous SiO2-NPs Insecticides, physical contact, or absorption through the insect’s cuticular layer. Non-target organism toxicity potential. [148][24]
Mesoporous -- Damaging phytophthora infestans through intracellular peroxidation. [149][25]
Spiky -- Improved adhesion and performance of spinosad pesticide. [150][26]
Nanocarriers -- Enhanced solubility and uptake of hydrophobic agrochemicals. [151][27]
With essential oils -- Bio-efficacy on insect pests of economic and medical importance. [123][1]
Silica NPs in stored grain -- Control of stored grain pests, against two stored grain pests, S. oryzae, Tribolium castaneum, and two field pests, Lipaphis pseudobrassicae and Spodoptera litura. [152,153][28][29]
Nanoemulsion NPCs
Oil-in-Water (O/W) Nanoemulsions Oil droplets dispersed in water. The oil:surfactant:water ratio can be 10:5:85, in volume percent. Efficient for encapsulating and delivering lipophilic compounds with small droplet size and improved functional properties. Pesticides can also improve food quality and shelf life through biodegradable coating and packaging films. The search results do not specifically mention the ecological risk of nanoemulsions. [154,155,156,157,158][30][31][32][33][34]
Bicontinuous Oil and water droplets are mixed together. Bicontinuous nanoemulsions form through a two-step process, starting with a bicontinuous microemulsion formation. Providing a mechanism for the encapsulation and delivery of active ingredients. The ecological risk of bicontinuous nanoemulsions is not specifically mentioned in the search results. [158,159][34][35]
Water in Oil (W/O) Consists of water droplets dispersed in oil. The ideal nanoemulsion formulation consists of 7.4% (w/w) dispersed phase (such as phenolic-rich aqueous phase from olive cake extract) and 11.2% (w/w) surfactant mixture in an oil continuous phase. Widely used in foods, medicines, and cosmetics for the encapsulation and delivery of AIs. The ecological risk of W/O nanoemulsions is not specifically mentioned in the search results. [155,158,160][31][34][36]
Nutraceutical Nanoemulsions Various oils, surfactants, and bioactive compounds Enhances bioavailability of long-chain fatty acids. Potential toxicity towards non-target organisms, needs further research. [154][30]
Polymer-Based NPCs
Nanocapsule Polycaprolactone (PCL), Polyethylene glycol (PEG), Polylactic acid (PLA). Enhanced precision and absorption, extended release, reduced chemical wastage. Aquatic environments at risk from off-site movement. [152,161,162][28][37][38]
Nanosphere Alginic acid, gelatin, polylactic acid, chitosan, polylactide-co-glycolide, and polycaprolactone Improved efficacy through controlled release and photo-degradation resistance, maximizing impact on target organisms. Evenly distribute AIs, enhance uptake and stability of spray solution, ensure uniform distribution. [146,161,162][22][37][38]
Micelle, nanogel, electrospun nanofibers Not specified Not specified. Environmental risks and future challenges are still being debated. [161][37]
Chitosan-Based NPCs
Chitosan–Alginate Chitosan and alginate NPs carrying the herbicide paraquat Efficient herbicide delivery to target plants (50–70% encapsulation efficiencies). Lower toxicity and genotoxicity. [163,164][39][40]
Chitosan-coated mesoporous silica Chitosan-coated mesoporous silica NPs Reduced disease and boosted fruit yield in watermelon seedling leaves (27% disease decrease, 70% fruit yield increase). 43.1% toxicity reduction in comparison to non-nanoscale analogues. [17,152][3][28]
RNAi-Chitosan Chitosan NPs used in the synthesis of RNAi-chitosan NPCs Efficiently controls forest insect pests and microbes. Ecological impact is low because it is biocompatible, biodegradable, and non-toxic. [165,[41166]][42]
Chitosan NPs encapsulating spinosad Chitosan NPs encapsulating Spinosad Not specified. Not explicitly mentioned in the search results. [123][1]
Nanocapsules (NCs)
Metal-based NCs Metal-based NPs (Ag, Cu, Ti) encapsulating AIs Not specified. Potential risk to human health from occupational exposure. [17][3]
Polymer- and clay-based NCs Nanocarriers (polymers, clays, zein nanoparticles) encapsulating AIs Non-toxic to soil biota and the rhizosphere microbiome. Potential risk to human health from occupational exposure. [17][3]
Dual-functionalized pesticide NCs NCs loaded with two AIs, validamycin and thifluzamide Effective against Rhizoctonia solani at 0.0082 μg/mL. Not specified. [167][43]
Nano-emulsions based on lipids Lipid-based nano-emulsions encapsulating essential oils of citronella and neem Higher efficacy than classic insecticides. Not specified. [168][44]
Polymer-based NCs NCs composed of natural polymers like chitosan, cellulose, and polylactide Enhanced formulation, simplified application, precise pest targeting, heightened efficacy, reduced application rates. Ecological risk is not mentioned in the search results, but concerns exist about novel products and their environmental impact. [17,123,152,[3][28162][1]][38]
Clay-based NCs NCs composed of clay minerals like bentonite, smectite, chaolite, and montmorillonite Enhanced efficacy, safety, and stability of agrochemicals for longer durations. [123,152][1][28]
Figure 51.
Schematic diagram of different types of nanocarriers which have been used to encapsulate AIs (type 2 NPCs).
(a)
Silica:
Silicon’s ability to improve plant tolerance to different stresses has been well established. As a result, silica nanoparticles have been proposed as potential tools for better pest management in agriculture [169][45] and later investigated for their potential in delivering pesticidal effects [151][27]. Silicon dioxide NPs (SiO2-NPs) exhibit a porous structure, exceptional surface activity, and notable adsorption properties, rendering them highly suitable for diverse applications, including their potential utilization in nanopesticides (1). This porosity enhances the contact between pesticides and siliceous frameworks, potentially improving their effectiveness by increasing UV-shielding capabilities [151][27], and lets them serve as an excellent nanocarriers for different agrochemicals [130][4]. They can be used in agriculture in two ways: as direct field application pesticides, killing insects, and as carriers for different herbicides and insecticides due to their ability to enhance the longevity and effectiveness of various commercial pesticides [170][46]. However, their efficacy as pesticides may vary depending on their origin and composition. For example, the efficacy of a compound derived from crystalline silica samples was found to be lower in suppressing potato tuber moth when compared to that derived from amorphous silica powders [171][47]. Studies have demonstrated that this type of NP can exert toxic effects on non-target organisms. For instance, Galleria mellonella larvae exposed to SiO2-NPs exhibited a notable reduction in both total hemocyte count and hemocyte viability [172][48]. Nanotubes containing aluminosilicate have been found to attach to plant surfaces and insect hair, allowing them to enter the insect body and disrupt its physiological functions. They caused 100% mortality in the cowpea weevil C. maculatus when applied at a rate of 2.06 g/kg. Chlorpyrifos-loaded SiO2-NPs (Ch-SNPs) were found to effectively control R. dominica and T. confusum, with mortality increasing as the concentration of Ch-SNPs increased [130][4]. These NPs derived from Alstonia scholaris exhibited increased toxicity against R. dominica, as evidenced by an LC50 value of 0.8 mg/mL and an LC95 value of 1.95 mg/mL. The repellent properties of NPs when combined with the plant oil Ricinus communis also increased against T. castaneum [130][4]. Table 3 provides a general overview of some examples of silica nanopesticides and their applications. The specific properties and applications of silica nanopesticides can vary depending on the type of nanoparticle and the target organism.
(b)
Nanoemulsions:
Nanoemulsion-based pesticide formulations refer to a specific category of pesticide formulations that involve the integration of AIs within a nanoemulsion system. They are colloidal dispersions that consist of extremely small particles, typically within the size range of 20–200 nm. These emulsions are economically cheaper and commonly composed of oil-in-water (O/W type) phases [130,173][4][49]. The purpose of these formulations is to mitigate and manage the impact of pests and diseases on crops. They have been specifically developed to optimize efficacy by functioning as a carrier to transport and administer bioactive compounds to the intended pests in agricultural settings [173][49]. Their notable benefit is cost-effectiveness due to their high water solubility, allowing them to easily dissolve hydrophilic and lipophilic compounds. Consequently, a reduced amount of AIs and inert material is needed. The improved solubility and absorption of these formulations lead to enhanced efficacy against pathogenic organisms such as bacteria, fungi, and insects [173,174][49][50]. This potentially contributes to the reduction of environmental pollution [123][1]. In addition, nanoemulsions show excellent storage stability over a wide temperature range (−10 to 55 °C). They have demonstrated their effectiveness in combating various storage pests, including adults and larvae [130][4].
SiO2-NPs are employed as carriers in nanoemulsions, which is an example of utilizing mesoporous SiO2-NPs as delivery systems for hydrophobic substances such as drugs and pesticides. These SiO2-NPs improve the stability and efficacy of the nanoemulsion, specifically in delivering AI to pests in agriculture. They, with the aid of SiO2-NPs, have shown promise in enhancing the delivery and effectiveness of lipid-soluble substances in pesticide formulations [174,175][50][51]. Another example is β-cypermethrin, which has been successfully integrated into nanoemulsions through the utilization of different surfactants and oil phases, leading to the formation of stable pesticides exhibiting enhanced characteristics [174][50]. Their application in formulations has demonstrated potential for enhancing pest control efficacy, particularly with regard to insects that commonly infest stored grains [130][4]. Neem oil-containing nanoemulsions have proven effective against two economically significant agricultural pests: the red flour beetle (Tribolium castaneum) and the rice weevil (Sitophilus oryzae) [176][52]. In terms of pest control in particular, nanoemulsions present a promising alternative that can improve safety in human health and environmental aspects with the least amount of harm to the environment and non-targeted organisms [176,177][52][53]. Table 31 summarizes the types, composition, effectiveness, and ecological risks of the specified nanoemulsions. Further investigation is required to fully comprehend their potential ecological risks and their impacts on non-target organisms [154][30].
(c)
Polymer-Based Nanopesticides (PB-NPCs):
PB-NPCs employ polymeric nanoparticles as carriers for active ingredients in pesticide formulations. NPs usually have dimensions ranging from 1 to 1000 nm [161][37]. The AIs are encapsulated within these polymers, which can encompass a range of agrochemicals including insecticides, herbicides, and fungicides [161,162][37][38]. Polymeric NPs possess biocompatibility, biodegradability, and the ability to undergo chemical surface modification, rendering them highly appealing for pesticide delivery [162][38]. NPs possess advantageous characteristics including controlled release of AIs, safeguarding against degradation, and enhanced water solubility [161,178][37][54]. Several examples exist of PB-NPCs, which serve as effective polymer nanocarriers. These nanocarriers possess desirable characteristics such as the ability to design intricate pesticide delivery systems with diverse modes of action, biocompatibility, scalability in preparation, and biodegradability [146][22]. Pesticide molecules are distributed randomly within a polymer matrix in nanocapsules called polymer micelles, forming a core-shell structure in polymer nanospheres. This serves as a reservoir for encapsulation [146][22]. Polycaprolactone (PCL), polyethylene glycol (PEG) and polylactic acid (PLA) are biodegradable polyesters utilized in the fabrication of PB-NPCs. One advantage of them is that they provide the ability to control the release of substances, as well as compatibility with biological systems. PEG is recognized for its capacity to improve the solubility and stability of AIs [161][37]. Chitosan, a naturally occurring polymer obtained from chitin, has been widely utilized in NPC formulations due to its abundant availability and inherent properties. It also provides benefits such as biocompatibility, biodegradability, and controlled release of active compounds [161][37]. The potential environmental and health impacts of PB-NPCs necessitate comprehensive evaluation and additional research to ensure their safe and effective implementation, despite their promising benefits for sustainable agriculture [161][37]. The composition, efficacy, and ecological risks of a few different types of PB-NPCs are summarized in Table 31.
(d)
Chitosan-Based Nanopesticides (Chit-NPCs):
Chit-NPCs have garnered considerable interest in the agricultural sector owing to their distinct characteristics. Chitosan is a linear polysaccharide that is derived from chitin through the process of deacetylation. It is a naturally occurring substance. The material possesses biodegradability, biocompatibility, and non-toxicity, rendering it highly suitable for diverse applications [179][55]. Chit-NPCs have been found to exhibit dual functionality in agriculture, serving as both growth enhancers and potent antimicrobial agents against pathogenic fungi and bacteria. They can be developed by utilizing NPs as carriers for existing AIs [180][56]. The efficacy of these mechanisms can be augmented by the diminutive dimensions of the chitosan nanoformulations [180][56]. Silva et al. (2011) devised chitosan and alginate nanoparticles as carriers for the herbicide paraquat [164][40]. This intervention led to a reduction in disease incidence and a simultaneous enhancement in fruit yield [17][3]. Chit-NPCs have been used in the production of RNAi-Chit-NPCs (RChit-NPCs) to effectively control forest insect pests [181][57]. They can be used in drug delivery systems owing to their mucoadhesive characteristics, positive surface charge, and capacity to disrupt intercellular tight junctions [182][58]. Common techniques for the production of Chit-NPCs include ionotropic gelation, microemulsion, emulsification solvent diffusion, and emulsion-based solvent evaporation. Their particle size and surface charge are influenced by several key characteristics, including molecular weight, degree of deacetylation, pH, and chitosan concentration [166][42]. Table 31 summarizes the types, composition, effectiveness, and ecological risks of Chit-NPCs.
(e)
Nanocapsules (NCs):
NCs are a specific class of nanopesticides that encapsulate pesticide AIs within a nanoscale shell. Similar to other NACs, these novel formulations also present many benefits compared to conventional pesticides, augmenting their effectiveness, safety, and ecological sustainability [17,123][1][3]. They can be synthesized from diverse materials such as clay minerals (bentonite, smectite, chaolite, and montmorillonite), lipids (triglycerides or waxes), inorganic porous materials, natural polymers (chitosan, cellulose, and polylactide), and synthetic polymers (polylactic acid) [17,123][1][3]. The AIs within the NCs can be incorporated into the matrix through either chemical bonding or physical adsorption, employing various techniques. This is an effective strategy to mitigate the loss of efficacy caused by evaporation, degradation, and leaching. Furthermore, it enhances the activity of substances by facilitating improved interactions with various harmful pests [123][1]. It shows a 31% increase in efficacy against target organisms and a 43% decrease in toxicity towards non-target organisms [183][59]. NCs have the potential to enhance the efficacy of pesticides through improvements in permeability, solubility, stability, and controlled release mechanisms [2][60].
In addition, they possess distinctive physicochemical characteristics, including adjustable dimensions, minimal cytotoxicity, and heightened efficacy of encapsulated AIs. Consequently, they can serve as a proficient vehicle for delivering AIs. This phenomenon may result in enhanced absorption by pests and heightened pesticidal efficacy [183][59]. Although NCs have numerous advantages, they also present certain potential challenges. Their distinctive physicochemical characteristics, which contribute to their biological impact, may also present unforeseen toxic hazards. To ensure their safe utilization, it is imperative to possess a thorough comprehension of nanoparticle toxicity [184][61].
However, the development and optimization of NC formulations is a complex process that necessitates specialized expertise [167][43]. The initial cost of NC-based pesticides may be higher compared to conventional formulations, which can be primarily attributed to the expenses involved in registering a novel AI [185][62]. Liposome NCs have the ability to encapsulate diverse pesticide AIs, exhibiting notable effectiveness against a range of organisms including insects, fungi, bacteria, and other pests [186][63]. Polymeric NCs can be synthesized using a diverse range of polymers, including both synthetic and natural polymers. They offer controlled release properties and can be modified for precise delivery [167,185][43][62]. Solid lipid nanoparticle (SLNs) NCs are composed of solid lipids, specifically triglycerides or waxes [167,185][43][62]. SLN formulations have already proven to be suitable carriers in agriculture [187][64]. NPs offer a sustained release mechanism for pesticides, commonly employed for foliar applications [167,185][43][62]. The efficacy of NPCs is addressed in Table 31, while an explicit discussion on ecological risks is absent in the literature. However, they are widely acknowledged for their biocompatibility and biodegradability, indicating a potentially lower ecological impact compared to conventional pesticides [17,123,162][1][3][38].
Semiconductor nanoparticles called “quantum dots” and carbon nanotubes are used for the targeted application of pesticides and agricultural chemicals to plants [15][8]. Liposomes, which are spherical vesicles made of lipids, are a precise method of delivering pesticides and agrochemicals to plants. Dendrimers in the shape of trees are effective at delivering pesticide AIs to crops with pinpoint accuracy. Nanocapsules, which are comprised of extremely small particles of polymer, can efficiently deliver agricultural chemicals to plants. Water, oil, and surfactants form nanoemulsions, which can be used to selectively deliver agricultural chemicals to plants [1,15][8][65].

2. Effectiveness of Nano-Agrochemicals

The efficacy of nano-agrochemicals in agricultural applications has been substantiated by their demonstrated ability to yield desired outcomes. They are employed to enhance the efficacy of pesticides and herbicides relative to their conventional counterparts, with the aim of enhancing disease management and pest control. They have shown to be up to ten times more toxic to their target pest than their non-nano analogues and their usage can reduce environmental contamination by 20–30% [188][66]. NPCs and NHCs are very effective in agriculture for nutrient and pest management due to their efficiency, high penetration ability into plant tissues or insect cuticles, and surface area due to their nano-size. These particles are environmentally friendly and effectively mitigate environmental pollution [189][67].
The success of these innovative agrochemicals can be attributed to a multitude of factors, such as the nanomaterial or encapsulation technique used, the pests or diseases they are designed to combat, the mechanisms underlying their functionality, and the methods by which they are applied. They demonstrate superior performance compared to conventional pesticides in various aspects [13][2]. Some examples of desirable characteristics in an agrochemical include the following: the ability to selectively target specific plant parts or pests for the delivery of active ingredients while minimizing off-target effects; the reduction of pesticide loss due to runoff or degradation [17,123][1][3]; the reduction of pesticide toxicity to non-target organisms; and the demonstration of synergistic effects when used in conjunction with other agrochemicals [13,190][2][68]. However, different formulations may display different functionalities, and researchers are currently investigating this. NPs’ stability, environmental interactions, and compatibility with different crop varieties must all be carefully evaluated. NACs need to be tested in the field to prove their efficacy and checked for safety before they can be used widely in agriculture [13][2]. The proposed antimicrobial mechanism for metal NPs is shown diagrammatically in Figure 62 [191][69]. It is important to remember that research is still being done to determine whether or not NACs are effective, and that different formulations may produce different results. It is critical to consider nanoparticle stability, environmental factors, and crop compatibility.
Figure 62.
A diagrammatic representation of the proposed antimicrobial mechanism for metal NPs.

3. Ecological Risks of Nano-Agrochemicals

Ecological risks are defined as the effect and behavior of NACs on communities, populations, and ecosystems as compared to the other contaminants present in the environment. The ability of NPs to retain their properties, reactivity, and particle size when they enter the environment can make them toxic to the targeted organisms as well as non-targeted species [192,193][70][71]. As mentioned earlier, NACs have shown different effects on field crops as compared to conventional products [193][71]. Due to the excessive usage of NACs in the environment, their ecological risks have become a major concern in the last few years. The toxicity of NPs and NACs can be determined by their shape, size, and biodegradability. NPs can be classified on the basis of their shape and biodegradability into four categories: (i) size < 100 nm and non-biodegradable, (ii) size < 100 nm and biodegradable, (iii) size > 100 nm and biodegradable, (iv) size > 100 nm and non-biodegradable [194][72]. Certainly, non-biodegradable products can persist in the body and present enhanced toxicity risks. It is suggested that NPs have compound interactions with microorganisms present in the soil; even the minimum concentration of nanoparticles can disturb a microbial community [195][73]. Soil microbes play a very important role in the maintenance of soil ecosystems by performing different activities including nutrient recycling, growth enhancement, decomposition of soil organic matter, disease suppression, etc. Any substance that shows negative effects on microbial populations in soil may disturb the sustainability and quality of soil [130][4]. Similarly, a plant-associated community, Bradyrhizobium canariense, was revealed to be significantly sensitive to NPs [196][74]. Globally, the applications and safe use of nanoparticles for crop protection and yield enhancement are currently a major concern. It has been found that AgNPs showed some inhibitory effects on the activity of soil exoenzymes which enhance soil’s biochemical processes [197][75].
Conducting a comprehensive examination of the environmental fate, toxicity, and long-term consequences associated with their use is imperative prior to their widespread implementation. Regulatory frameworks are of the utmost importance, given their distinctive characteristics, and in adherence to the precautionary principle [198,199][76][77]. By adopting sustainable pest control strategies, one can effectively mitigate environmental impacts and reduce reliance on pesticides. Disseminating information regarding the advantages and disadvantages of nano-agrochemical use is crucial to fostering well-informed public discourse and ensuring responsible progress [200][78]. The implementation of nanocarriers to deliver pesticides specifically to pests has the potential to mitigate ecological risks and decrease environmental exposure [17][3].

References

  1. Chaud, M.; Souto, E.B.; Zielinska, A.; Severino, P.; Batain, F.; Oliveira-Junior, J.; Alves, T. Nanopesticides in Agriculture: Benefits and Challenge in Agricultural Productivity, Toxicological Risks to Human Health and Environment. Toxics 2021, 9, 131.
  2. An, C.; Sun, C.; Li, N.; Huang, B.; Jiang, J.; Shen, Y.; Wang, C.; Zhao, X.; Cui, B.; Wang, C. Nanomaterials and Nanotechnology for the Delivery of Agrochemicals: Strategies towards Sustainable Agriculture. J. Nanobiotechnol. 2022, 20, 11.
  3. Wang, D.; Saleh, N.B.; Byro, A.; Zepp, R.; Sahle-Demessie, E.; Luxton, T.P.; Ho, K.T.; Burgess, R.M.; Flury, M.; White, J.C. Nano-Enabled Pesticides for Sustainable Agriculture and Global Food Security. Nat. Nanotechnol. 2022, 17, 347–360.
  4. Jasrotia, P.; Nagpal, M.; Mishra, C.N.; Sharma, A.K.; Kumar, S.; Kamble, U.; Bhardwaj, A.K.; Kashyap, P.L.; Kumar, S.; Singh, G.P. Nanomaterials for Postharvest Management of Insect Pests: Current State and Future Perspectives. Front. Nanotechnol. 2022, 3, 811056.
  5. Baliyarsingh, B.; Pradhan, C.K. Prospects of Plant-Derived Metallic Nanopesticides against Storage Pests–A Review. J. Agric. Food Res. 2023, 100687.
  6. Raptopoulou, C.P. Metal-Organic Frameworks: Synthetic Methods and Potential Applications. Materials 2021, 14, 310.
  7. Slavin, Y.N.; Asnis, J.; Häfeli, U.O.; Bach, H. Metal Nanoparticles: Understanding the Mechanisms behind Antibacterial Activity. J. Nanobiotechnol. 2017, 15, 65.
  8. Mittal, D.; Kaur, G.; Singh, P.; Yadav, K.; Ali, S.A. Nanoparticle-Based Sustainable Agriculture and Food Science: Recent Advances and Future Outlook. Front. Nanotechnol. 2020, 2, 579954.
  9. Ramkumar, S.; Baskar, V.; Skymoon, R.; Pooja, T.; Gangadhar, B.H.; Umadevi, S.; Murali, K.S.; Chung, I.M.; Thiruvengadam, M. Green Synthesis of Nanoparticles and Their Uses in Agriculture. In Nano-Enabled Agrochemicals in Agriculture; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2022; pp. 247–271.
  10. Bahrulolum, H.; Nooraei, S.; Javanshir, N.; Tarrahimofrad, H.; Mirbagheri, V.S.; Easton, A.J.; Ahmadian, G. Green Synthesis of Metal Nanoparticles Using Microorganisms and Their Application in the Agrifood Sector. J. Nanobiotechnol. 2021, 19, 86.
  11. Giannousi, K.; Avramidis, I.; Dendrinou-Samara, C. Synthesis, Characterization and Evaluation of Copper Based Nanoparticles as Agrochemicals against Phytophthora Infestans. RSC Adv. 2013, 3, 21743–21752.
  12. Merkl, P.; Long, S.; McInerney, G.M.; Sotiriou, G.A. Antiviral Activity of Silver, Copper Oxide and Zinc Oxide Nanoparticle Coatings against Sars-Cov-2. Nanomaterials 2021, 11, 1312.
  13. Siddiqi, K.S.; ur Rahman, A.; Tajuddin, N.; Husen, A. Properties of Zinc Oxide Nanoparticles and Their Activity Against Microbes. Nanoscale Res. Lett. 2018, 13, 141.
  14. Benelli, G. Mode of Action of Nanoparticles against Insects. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2018, 25, 12329–12341.
  15. de Lima, P.H.C.; Antunes, D.R.; de Lima Forini, M.M.; da Silva Pontes, M.; Mattos, B.D.; Grillo, R. Recent Advances on Lignocellulosic-Based Nanopesticides for Agricultural Applications. Front. Nanotechnol. 2021, 3, 809329.
  16. Ivonne Gonzalez GamboaAdam CaparcoNicole Steinmetz Tobacco Mild Green Mosaic Virus as a Multifunctional Platform for Efficient Pesticide Delivery. Available online: https://www.morressier.com/o/event/623377e0b300ee00119b311f/article/6234a1ca818a915252b81dd9 (accessed on 25 November 2023).
  17. Venkateswaran, U.P.; Caparco, A.A.; González-Gamboa, I.; Caballero, R.M.; Schuphan, J.; Steinmetz, N.F. Plant Viral Nanocarrier Soil Mobility as a Function of Soil Type and Nanoparticle Properties. ACS Agric. Sci. Technol. 2023, 3, 583–592.
  18. Li, L.; Xu, Z.; Kah, M.; Lin, D.; Filser, J. Nanopesticides: A Comprehensive Assessment of Environmental Risk Is Needed before Widespread Agricultural Application. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2019, 53, 7923–7924.
  19. Ihtisham, M.; Noori, A.; Yadav, S.; Sarraf, M.; Kumari, P.; Brestic, M.; Imran, M.; Jiang, F.; Yan, X.; Rastogi, A. Silver Nanoparticle’s Toxicological Effects and Phytoremediation. Nanomaterials 2021, 11, 2164.
  20. Yuan, Z.; Li, Y.; He, Y.; Qian, K.; Zhang, Y. Differential Analysis of Three Copper-Based Nanomaterials with Different Morphologies to Suppress Alternaria Alternata and Safety Evaluation. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2023, 24, 9673.
  21. Beegam, A.; Prasad, P.; Jose, J.; Oliveira, M.; Costa, F.G.; Soares, A.; Gonçalves, P.P.; Trindade, T.; Kalarikkal, N.; Thomas, S. Environmental Fate of Zinc Oxide Nanoparticles: Risks and Benefits. In Toxicology-New Aspects to This Scientific Conundrum; IntechOpen: London, UK, 2016; Volume 33.
  22. Deka, B.; Babu, A.; Baruah, C.; Barthakur, M. Nanopesticides: A Systematic Review of Their Prospects with Special Reference to Tea Pest Management. Front. Nutr. 2021, 8, 686131.
  23. Rashid, M.M.; Forte Tavčer, P.; Tomšič, B. Influence of Titanium Dioxide Nanoparticles on Human Health and the Environment. Nanomaterials 2021, 11, 2354.
  24. Thabet, A.F.; Boraei, H.A.; Galal, O.A.; El-Samahy, M.F.M.; Mousa, K.M.; Zhang, Y.Z.; Tuda, M.; Helmy, E.A.; Wen, J.; Nozaki, T. Silica Nanoparticles as Pesticide against Insects of Different Feeding Types and Their Non-Target Attraction of Predators. Sci. Rep. 2021, 11, 14484.
  25. Book, F.; Persson, M.; Carmona, E.; Backhaus, T.; Lammel, T. Colloidal Silica Nanomaterials Reduce the Toxicity of Pesticides to Algae, Depending on Charge and Surface Area. Environ. Sci. Nano 2022, 9, 2402–2416.
  26. Kookana, R.S.; Boxall, A.B.A.; Reeves, P.T.; Ashauer, R.; Beulke, S.; Chaudhry, Q.; Cornelis, G.; Fernandes, T.F.; Gan, J.; Kah, M. Nanopesticides: Guiding Principles for Regulatory Evaluation of Environmental Risks. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2014, 62, 4227–4240.
  27. Zhang, J.; Kothalawala, S.; Yu, C. Engineered Silica Nanomaterials in Pesticide Delivery: Challenges and Perspectives. Environ. Pollut. 2023, 320, 121045.
  28. Walker, G.W.; Kookana, R.S.; Smith, N.E.; Kah, M.; Doolette, C.L.; Reeves, P.T.; Lovell, W.; Anderson, D.J.; Turney, T.W.; Navarro, D.A. Ecological Risk Assessment of Nano-Enabled Pesticides: A Perspective on Problem Formulation. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2017, 66, 6480–6486.
  29. Goswami, A.; Roy, I.; Sengupta, S.; Debnath, N. Novel Applications of Solid and Liquid Formulations of Nanoparticles against Insect Pests and Pathogens. Thin Solid Films 2010, 519, 1252–1257.
  30. Pavoni, L.; Perinelli, D.R.; Bonacucina, G.; Cespi, M.; Palmieri, G.F. An Overview of Micro-and Nanoemulsions as Vehicles for Essential Oils: Formulation, Preparation and Stability. Nanomaterials 2020, 10, 135.
  31. Jaiswal, M.; Dudhe, R.; Sharma, P.K. Nanoemulsion: An Advanced Mode of Drug Delivery System. 3 Biotech 2015, 5, 123–127.
  32. Manickam, S.; Sivakumar, K.; Pang, C.H. Investigations on the Generation of Oil-in-Water (O/W) Nanoemulsions through the Combination of Ultrasound and Microchannel. Ultrason Sonochem. 2020, 69, 105258.
  33. Aswathanarayan, J.B.; Vittal, R.R. Nanoemulsions and Their Potential Applications in Food Industry. Front. Sustain. Food Syst. 2019, 3, 95.
  34. Macko, M.; Antoš, J.; Božek, F.; Konečný, J.; Huzlík, J.; Hegrová, J.; Kuřitka, I. Development of New Health Risk Assessment of Nanoparticles: EPA Health Risk Assessment Revised. Nanomaterials 2022, 13, 20.
  35. Gupta, A.; Eral, H.B.; Hatton, T.A.; Doyle, P.S. Nanoemulsions: Formation, Properties and Applications. Soft Matter 2016, 12, 2826–2841.
  36. Niknam, S.M.; Kashaninejad, M.; Escudero, I.; Sanz, M.T.; Beltrán, S.; Benito, J.M. Preparation of Water-in-Oil Nanoemulsions Loaded with Phenolic-Rich Olive Cake Extract Using Response Surface Methodology Approach. Foods 2022, 11, 279.
  37. Sun, C.; Zeng, Z.; Cui, H.; Verheggen, F. Polymer-Based Nanoinsecticides: Current Developments, Environmental Risks and Future ChallengesߞA Review. Biotechnol. Agron. Société Environ. 2020, 24, 59–69.
  38. Prado-Audelo, D.; Luisa, M.; Bernal-Chávez, S.A.; Gutiérrez-Ruíz, S.C.; Hernández-Parra, H.; Kerdan, I.G.; Reyna-González, J.M.; Sharifi-Rad, J.; Leyva-Gómez, G. Stability Phenomena Associated with the Development of Polymer-Based Nanopesticides. Oxid. Med. Cell Longev. 2022, 2022, 5766199.
  39. Kumar, S.; Dutta, P.K. Role of Chitosan and Chitosan-Based Nanoparticles in Pesticide Delivery: Avenues and Applications. In Role of Chitosan and Chitosan-Based Nanomaterials in Plant Sciences; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2022; pp. 401–434.
  40. Maruyama, C.R.; Guilger, M.; Pascoli, M.; Bileshy-José, N.; Abhilash, P.C.; Fraceto, L.F.; De Lima, R. Nanoparticles Based on Chitosan as Carriers for the Combined Herbicides Imazapic and Imazapyr. Sci. Rep. 2016, 6, 19768.
  41. Naskar, S.; Sharma, S.; Kuotsu, K. Chitosan-Based Nanoparticles: An Overview of Biomedical Applications and Its Preparation. J. Drug Deliv. Sci. Technol. 2019, 49, 66–81.
  42. Mohammed, M.A.; Syeda, J.T.M.; Wasan, K.M.; Wasan, E.K. An Overview of Chitosan Nanoparticles and Its Application in Non-Parenteral Drug Delivery. Pharmaceutics 2017, 9, 53.
  43. Cui, J.; Sun, C.; Wang, A.; Wang, Y.; Zhu, H.; Shen, Y.; Li, N.; Zhao, X.; Cui, B.; Wang, C. Dual-Functionalized Pesticide Nanocapsule Delivery System with Improved Spreading Behavior and Enhanced Bioactivity. Nanomaterials 2020, 10, 220.
  44. Rehman, M.F.U.; Khan, M.M. Application of Nanopesticides and Its Toxicity Evaluation through Drosophila Model. Bioprocess Biosyst. Eng. 2023, 1–22.
  45. Kah, M.; Hofmann, T. Nanopesticide Research: Current Trends and Future Priorities. Environ. Int. 2014, 63, 224–235.
  46. Rastogi, A.; Tripathi, D.K.; Yadav, S.; Chauhan, D.K.; Živčák, M.; Ghorbanpour, M.; El-Sheery, N.I.; Brestic, M. Application of Silicon Nanoparticles in Agriculture. 3 Biotech 2019, 9, 90.
  47. Idris, I.; Naddaf, M.; Harmalani, H.; Alshater, R.; Alsafadi, R. Efficacy of Olive Stones and Corncobs Crystalline Silica Nanoparticles (Sio2, NPs) Treatments on Potato Tuber Moths (Phthorimaea operculella). Silicon 2023, 15, 3591–3598.
  48. Eskin, A. Effects of Silicon Dioxide Nanoparticles (SiO2 NPs) on Total Hemocyte Count and Hemocyte Viability of Galleria Mellonella. Int. J. Trop. Insect Sci. 2022, 42, 2617–2623.
  49. Mustafa, I.F.; Hussein, M.Z. Synthesis and Technology of Nanoemulsion-Based Pesticide Formulation. Nanomaterials 2020, 10, 1608.
  50. Zhao, X.; Zhu, Y.; Zhang, C.; Lei, J.; Ma, Y.; Du, F. Positive Charge Pesticide Nanoemulsions Prepared by the Phase Inversion Composition Method with Ionic Liquids. RSC Adv. 2017, 7, 48586–48596.
  51. Wilson, R.J.; Li, Y.; Yang, G.; Zhao, C.-X. Nanoemulsions for Drug Delivery. Particuology 2022, 64, 85–97.
  52. McClements, D.J.; Das, A.K.; Dhar, P.; Nanda, P.K.; Chatterjee, N. Nanoemulsion-Based Technologies for Delivering Natural Plant-Based Antimicrobials in Foods. Front. Sustain. Food Syst. 2021, 5, 643208.
  53. Jesser, E.; Yeguerman, C.A.; Urrutia, R.I.; Murray, A.P.; Domini, C.; Werdin-González, J.O. Development and Characterization of Nanoemulsions Loaded with Essential Oil and Β-cypermethrin and Their Bioefficacy on Insect Pest of Economic and Medical Importance. Pest Manag. Sci. 2023, 79, 4162–4171.
  54. Kumar, R.; Kumar, N.; Rajput, V.D.; Mandzhieva, S.; Minkina, T.; Saharan, B.S.; Kumar, D.; Sadh, P.K.; Duhan, J.S. Advances in Biopolymeric Nanopesticides: A New Eco-Friendly/Eco-Protective Perspective in Precision Agriculture. Nanomaterials 2022, 12, 3964.
  55. Kravanja, G.; Primožič, M.; Knez, Ž.; Leitgeb, M. Chitosan-Based (Nano) Materials for Novel Biomedical Applications. Molecules 2019, 24, 1960.
  56. Maluin, F.N.; Hussein, M.Z. Chitosan-Based Agronanochemicals as a Sustainable Alternative in Crop Protection. Molecules 2020, 25, 1611.
  57. Mogilicherla, K.; Roy, A. RNAi-Chitosan Biopesticides for Managing Forest Insect Pests: An Outlook. Front. For. Glob. Change 2023, 6, 1219685.
  58. Frigaard, J.; Jensen, J.L.; Galtung, H.K.; Hiorth, M. The Potential of Chitosan in Nanomedicine: An Overview of the Cytotoxicity of Chitosan Based Nanoparticles. Front. Pharmacol. 2022, 13, 880377.
  59. Li, M.; Sun, X.; Yin, M.; Shen, J.; Yan, S. Recent Advances in Nanoparticle-Mediated Co-Delivery System: A Promising Strategy in Medical and Agricultural Field. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2023, 24, 5121.
  60. Rani, N.; Duhan, A.; Pal, A.; Kumari, P.; Beniwal, R.K.; Verma, D.; Goyat, A.; Singh, R. Are Nano-Pesticides Really Meant for Cleaner Production? An Overview on Recent Developments, Benefits, Environmental Hazards and Future Prospectives. J. Clean. Prod. 2023, 411, 137232.
  61. Ale, A.; Andrade, V.S.; Gutierrez, M.F.; Bacchetta, C.; Rossi, A.S.; Santo Orihuela, P.; Desimone, M.F.; Cazenave, J. Nanotechnology-Based Pesticides: Environmental Fate and Ecotoxicity. Toxicol. Appl. Pharmacol. 2023, 471, 116560.
  62. Sampathkumar, K.; Tan, K.X.; Loo, S.C.J. Developing Nano-Delivery Systems for Agriculture and Food Applications with Nature-Derived Polymers. iScience 2020, 23, 101055.
  63. Malam, Y.; Loizidou, M.; Seifalian, A.M. Liposomes and Nanoparticles: Nanosized Vehicles for Drug Delivery in Cancer. Trends Pharmacol. Sci. 2009, 30, 592–599.
  64. Lai, F.; Wissing, S.A.; Müller, R.H.; Fadda, A.M. Artemisia arborescens L. Essential Oil-Loaded Solid Lipid Nanoparticles for Potential Agricultural Application: Preparation and Characterization. AAPS PharmSciTech 2006, 7, E10–E18.
  65. Saha, S.; Bharadwaj, A. A Step towards Smart Agriculture Using Metallic Nanostructures. Plant Stress 2023, 10, 100216.
  66. Kah, M.; Kookana, R.S.; Gogos, A.; Bucheli, T.D. A Critical Evaluation of Nanopesticides and Nanofertilizers against Their Conventional Analogues. Nat. Nanotechnol. 2018, 13, 677–684.
  67. Qureshi, A.; Singh, D.K.; Dwivedi, S. Nano-Fertilizers: A Novel Way for Enhancing Nutrient Use Efficiency and Crop Productivity. Int. J. Curr. Microbiol. App. Sci 2018, 7, 3325–3335.
  68. White, J.C.; Gardea-Torresdey, J. Nanoscale Agrochemicals for Crop Health: A Key Line of Attack in the Battle for Global Food Security. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2021, 55, 13413–13416.
  69. Dizaj, S.M.; Lotfipour, F.; Barzegar-Jalali, M.; Zarrintan, M.H.; Adibkia, K. Antimicrobial Activity of the Metals and Metal Oxide Nanoparticles. Mater. Sci. Eng. C 2014, 44, 278–284.
  70. Martínez, G.; Merinero, M.; Pérez-Aranda, M.; Pérez-Soriano, E.M.; Ortiz, T.; Begines, B.; Alcudia, A. Environmental Impact of Nanoparticles’ Application as an Emerging Technology: A Review. Materials 2020, 14, 166.
  71. Vurro, M.; Miguel-Rojas, C.; Pérez-de-Luque, A. Safe Nanotechnologies for Increasing the Effectiveness of Environmentally Friendly Natural Agrochemicals. Pest Manag. Sci. 2019, 75, 2403–2412.
  72. Jampílek, J.; Kráľová, K. Application of Nanotechnology in Agriculture and Food Industry, Its Prospects and Risks. Ecol. Chem. Eng. S 2015, 22, 321–361.
  73. Pandey, S.; Giri, K.; Kumar, R.; Mishra, G.; Raja Rishi, R. Nanopesticides: Opportunities in Crop Protection and Associated Environmental Risks. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. India Sect. B Biol. Sci. 2018, 88, 1287–1308.
  74. He, S.; Feng, Y.; Ni, J.; Sun, Y.; Xue, L.; Feng, Y.; Yu, Y.; Lin, X.; Yang, L. Different Responses of Soil Microbial Metabolic Activity to Silver and Iron Oxide Nanoparticles. Chemosphere 2016, 147, 195–202.
  75. Shin, Y.-J.; Kwak, J.I.; An, Y.-J. Evidence for the Inhibitory Effects of Silver Nanoparticles on the Activities of Soil Exoenzymes. Chemosphere 2012, 88, 524–529.
  76. Kumari, R.; Suman, K.; Karmakar, S.; Mishra, V.; Lakra, S.G.; Saurav, G.K.; Mahto, B.K. Regulation and Safety Measures for Nanotechnology-Based Agri-Products. Front. Genome Ed. 2023, 5, 1200987.
  77. Kubiak-Hardiman, P.; Haughey, S.A.; Meneely, J.; Miller, S.; Banerjee, K.; Elliott, C.T. Identifying Gaps and Challenges in Global Pesticide Legislation That Impact the Protection of Consumer Health: Rice as a Case Study. Expo Health 2023, 15, 597–618.
  78. Liu, P.; Zheng, X.; Shangguan, S.; Zhao, L.; Fang, X.; Huang, Y.; Hermanowicz, S.W. Public Perceptions and Willingness-to-Pay for Nanopesticides. Nanomaterials 2022, 12, 1292.
More
© Text is available under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)
ScholarVision Creations
Feedback