Since engineering nanoparticles (ENP) have been developed for using in industry and human commodities, is common to find their wastes and by-products from industrial chemical reactions, and it is also possible to find incidental nanoparticles in the environment. Currently, the remediation of polluted soils using nanotechnologies has become an emerging area with a huge potential to improve the performance of traditional remediation technologies. However, environmental concerns have also emerged regarding human and environmental health when nanotechnologies are released to ecosystems. The goal of this manuscript is to highlight the environmental benefits and risks that arise when nanotechnologies are used to remediate polluted soils. We searched Web of Science and Scopus in order to get latest updated information and patents pertaining to developments in the field of nanotechnologies for decontaminating soils. It has been determined that soil nanoremediation has some advantages, but it also has some disadvantages related to the final disposal of nanoparticles, nanomaterials, or nanodevices. Will some nanotechnologies be our pitfall? Nanoparticle toxicity has to be assessed and the standardization of techniques should be set by scientists and decision-makers worldwide. Cutting-edge knowledge regarding the use of nanoparticles to decontaminate soils has to move forward, but environmental quality, human health, and social welfare should also be ensured.

No abstract

No abstract

Background: The application of synthetic pesticides to the tomato crop (Solanum lycopersicum -Solanaceae-) increases fruit production, but also carries risks for the environment, human and animal health. Hypothesis: local ruderal plant extracts could be an alternative for weed control, with potential applications in agroecology and organic agriculture. Methods: Organic and aqueous extracts (1 and 10% w/v) were prepared with the fresh (FAE) and dry (DAE) aerial parts of five ruderal species from Tlaxcala, Mexico: Argemone mexicana L. (Papaveraceae), Baccharis salicifolia Pers. (Asteraceae), Lepidium virginicum L. (Brassicaceae), Leucena leucocephala S. Zárate (Fabaceae) and Reseda luteola L. (Resedaceae). Their phytotoxic activity was evaluated in vitro with the seeds of three model plants (amaranth, lettuce, and tomato). Results: DAE of B. salicifolia and L. virginicum (1 % w/v) showed the highest potential as natural herbicides. These inhibited 100 % seed germination and radicle elongation in the three model plants but did not affect the growth of tomato seedlings of 8 and 12 weeks in greenhouse conditions. Both extracts analyzed by HPLC-ESI-QTOF-MS showed two major peaks. Bacharis salicifolia with m/z 432.9 and 725.4. Lepidium virginicum with m/z 532.9 and 527.1. Conclusions:DAE of local ruderal plants B. salicifolia and L. virginicum (1 % w/v) are potential natural herbicides, without harmful effects on tomato cultivated seedlings, awaiting the precise identification of their active compounds.

No abstract