Interactions between salt marsh plants and Cu nanoparticles – Effects on metal uptake and phytoremediation processes

Andreotti, Federico; Mucha, Ana P.; Caetano, Cátia; Rodrigues, Paula; Gomes, Carlos R.; Almeida, C. Marisa R.

doi:10.1016/j.ecoenv.2015.06.017

Cited by 43 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 54 publications

(78 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Previous reports have indicated the presence of a significant amount of Cu in plant roots exposed to CuONPs. Andreotti et al [ 68 ] found differences in Cu translocation in two salt marsh plant species ( Halimione portulacoides (L.) Aellen, and Phragmites australis (Cav.) Trin.).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…While Cu accumulated in the root of both plants, accumulation was significantly lower (4–10 times) when Cu was added as NPs. For H. portulacoides, no Cu translocation occurred in roots at 10 ppm NP (<50 nm) treatment, whereas for P. australis , Cu translocation occurred regardless of the type of Cu used (CuCl 2 or CuONPs <50 nm) [ 68 ]. In a recent study using cowpea, Ogunkunle et al [ 69 ] found a linear concentration response upon exposure to CuNPs (<25 nm and 60–80 nm) for Cu uptake by root, a finding consistent with our results.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Metal and metal oxide NPs can induce toxicity either by releasing toxic metal ions or by direct interaction with the cell [ 68 , 71 ]. Plants can absorb metals as dissolved or soluble ionic fractions, or as NPs themselves.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…CuONP–25 nm enabled greater Cu translocation to seeds [ 83 ], probably due to their smaller size that facilitated easier passage through the cell wall. NPs with a smaller particle size can increase Cu bioavailability even at low concentration, which may be due to increasing surface area of the smaller size NPs [ 68 ]. However, CuONPs with a larger particle size can form more aggregates with reduced surface area and thus decrease Cu bioavailability, especially in the seed.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Root System Architecture, Copper Uptake and Tissue Distribution in Soybean (Glycine max (L.) Merr.) Grown in Copper Oxide Nanoparticle (CuONP)-Amended Soil and Implications for Human Nutrition

Yusefi-Tanha

Fallah

Rostamnejadi

et al. 2020

Plants

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Understanding the potential uptake and biodistribution of engineered nanoparticles (ENPs) in soil-grown plants is imperative for realistic toxicity and risk assessment considering the oral intake of edibles by humans. Herein, growing N-fixing symbiont (Bradyrhizobium japonicum) inoculated soybean (Glycine max (L.) Merr.) for a full lifecycle of 120 days, we assessed the potential influence of particle size (25, 50, and 250 nm) and concentration (0, 50, 100, 200, and 500 mg/kg soil) of Copper oxide nanoparticles (CuONPs) on: (1) root system architecture, (2) soil physicochemical attributes at the soil–root interface, and (3) Cu transport and accumulation in root, stem, leaf, and seed in soybean, and compared them with the soluble Cu2+ ions and water-only controls. Finally, we performed a comparative assessment of total seed Cu levels in soybean with other valuable food sources for Cu intake and discussed potential human health implications. Results showed particle size- and concentration-dependent influence of CuONPs on Cu uptake and distribution in root, stem, leaf, and seed. Alterations in root architecture (root biomass, length, volume, and area) were dependent on the Cu compound types, Cu concentrations, and their interactions. Concentration–response relationships for all three sizes of CuONPs and Cu2+ ions were found to be linear. Furthermore, CuONPs and Cu2+ ions had inhibitory effects on root growth and development. Overall, soybean responses to the smallest size of CuONPs–25 nm—were greater for all parameters tested compared to the two larger-sized CuONPs (50 nm, 250 nm) or Cu2+ ions. Results suggest that minor changes in soil-root physicochemical attributes may not be a major driver for Cu uptake in soybean. Cu bioaccumulation followed the order: root > leaf > stem > seed. Despite reduction in root architecture and seed yield, the smallest size CuONPs–25 nm led to increased total seed Cu uptake compared to the larger-sized CuONPs or Cu2+ ions. Our findings also suggest that soil amendment with CuONPs, and more so with the smallest size of CuONPs–25 nm—could significantly improve seed nutritional Cu value in soybean as reflected by the % Daily Values (DV) and are rated “Good” to “Very Good” according to the “World’s Healthiest Foods” rating. However, until the potential toxicity and risk from CuONP-fortified soybean seed ingestion is characterized in humans, we caution recommending such seeds for daily human consumption when addressing food Cu-deficiency and associated diseases, globally.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Root System Architecture, Copper Uptake and Tissue Distribution in Soybean (Glycine max (L.) Merr.) Grown in Copper Oxide Nanoparticle (CuONP)-Amended Soil and Implications for Human Nutrition

Yusefi-Tanha

Fallah

Rostamnejadi

et al. 2020

Plants

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Duckweed exposed to CuO nanoparticles showed inhibition of photosynthetic activity due to the Cu 2+ ions released from it [ 120 ]. Andreotti et al [ 124 ] have found that Phragmites australis can relocate Cu from roots to shoots. CuO nanoparticle exposure to cotton and Bt cotton has shown significant alterations of the concentrations of indole-3-acetic acid and abscisic acid [ 125 ].…”

Section: Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Plant Response to Engineered Metal Oxide Nanoparticles

2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

All metal oxide nanoparticles influence the growth and development of plants. They generally enhance or reduce seed germination, shoot/root growth, biomass production and physiological and biochemical activities. Some plant species have not shown any physiological change, although significant variations in antioxidant enzyme activity and upregulation of heat shock protein have been observed. Plants have evolved antioxidant defence mechanism which involves enzymatic as well as non-enzymatic components to prevent oxidative damage and enhance plant resistance to metal oxide toxicity. The exact mechanism of plant defence against the toxicity of nanomaterials has not been fully explored. The absorption and translocation of metal oxide nanoparticles in different parts of the plant depend on their bioavailability, concentration, solubility and exposure time. Further, these nanoparticles may reach other organisms, animals and humans through food chain which may alter the entire biodiversity. This review attempts to summarize the plant response to a number of metal oxide nanoparticles and their translocation/distribution in root/shoot. The toxicity of metal oxide nanoparticles has also been considered to see if they affect the production of seeds, fruits and the plant biomass as a whole.

show abstract