Review
Development strategies and prospects of nano-based smart pesticide formulation Xiang Zhao, Haixin Cui, Yan Wang, Changjiao Sun, Bo Cui, and Zhanghua Zeng J. Agric. Food Chem., Just Accepted Manuscript • DOI: 10.1021/acs.jafc.7b02004 • Publication Date (Web): 27 Jun 2017 Downloaded from http://pubs.acs.org on June 28, 2017
Just Accepted “Just Accepted” manuscripts have been peer-reviewed and accepted for publication. They are posted online prior to technical editing, formatting for publication and author proofing. The American Chemical Society provides “Just Accepted” as a free service to the research community to expedite the dissemination of scientific material as soon as possible after acceptance. “Just Accepted” manuscripts appear in full in PDF format accompanied by an HTML abstract. “Just Accepted” manuscripts have been fully peer reviewed, but should not be considered the official version of record. They are accessible to all readers and citable by the Digital Object Identifier (DOI®). “Just Accepted” is an optional service offered to authors. Therefore, the “Just Accepted” Web site may not include all articles that will be published in the journal. After a manuscript is technically edited and formatted, it will be removed from the “Just Accepted” Web site and published as an ASAP article. Note that technical editing may introduce minor changes to the manuscript text and/or graphics which could affect content, and all legal disclaimers and ethical guidelines that apply to the journal pertain. ACS cannot be held responsible for errors or consequences arising from the use of information contained in these “Just Accepted” manuscripts.
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry is published by the American Chemical Society. 1155 Sixteenth Street N.W., Washington, DC 20036 Published by American Chemical Society. Copyright © American Chemical Society. However, no copyright claim is made to original U.S. Government works, or works produced by employees of any Commonwealth realm Crown government in the course of their duties.
Page 1 of 30
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry
1
Development strategies and prospects of nano-based smart
2
pesticide formulation
3
Xiang Zhao,1,2 Haixin Cui,1,2,* Yan Wang,1 Changjiao Sun,1 Bo Cui,1 and Zhanghua
4
Zeng1
5 6
1. Institute of Environment and Sustainable Development in Agriculture, Chinese Academy of
7
Agricultural Sciences
8
12 South Zhongguancun Street, Haidian District, Beijing, 100081, P. R. China
9
2. Nanobiotechnology Research Centre, Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences
10
12 South Zhongguancun Street, Haidian District, Beijing, 100081, P. R. China
11
E-mail:
[email protected] 12 13
ABSTRACT:
14
Pesticides are important inputs for enhancing crop productivity and preventing major
15
biological disasters. However, more than 90% of pesticides run off into the
16
environment and residue in agricultural products in process of application, due to the
17
disadvantages of conventional pesticide formulation such as use of harmful solvent,
18
poor dispersion, dust drift, etc. In recent years, using nanotechnology to create novel
19
formulations has shown great potential in improving the efficacy and safety of
20
pesticides. The development of nano-based pesticide formulation aims at precise
21
release of necessary and sufficient amounts of their active ingredients, in responding
22
to environmental triggers and biological demands through controlled release
23
mechanisms. This paper discusses several scientific issues and strategies regarding
24
development of nano-based pesticide formulations: (i) Construction of water-based
25
dispersion pesticide nanoformulation; (ii) Mechanism on leaf-targeted deposition and
26
dose transfer of pesticide nano-delivery system; (iii) Mechanism on increased
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry
of
nano-based
pesticide
formulation;
and
Page 2 of 30
27
bioavailability
(iv)
Impacts of
28
nanoformulation on natural degradation and bio-safety of pesticide residues.
29 30
KEYWORDS:
31
nano-delivery system
nanoformulation,
pesticide,
nanotechnology,
agriculture,
32 33
1. Introduction
34
Pesticides play an important role in defensing of biological disasters, ensuring
35
the crop productivity and promoting the sustained steady growth of agricultural
36
production1. According to the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United
37
Nations (FAO) statistics, pest and pathogen control with pesticides has restored 30%
38
of total output of agricultural products all over the world2,3. However, indiscriminate
39
pesticide usage also brings a serious threat to the environment and human health. The
40
annual input amounts of pesticides have reached 4.6 million tons worldwide, 90% of
41
which run off into the environment, residue in agricultural products and redistribute in
42
ecological cycle during application4-10. Inefficient use of pesticides causes a series of
43
ecological environment problems, such as pathogen and pest resistance, non-point
44
pollution, water eutrophication, soil degradation, bioaccumulation in food chain, and
45
loss of biodiversity (Figure 1).
46
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Page 3 of 30
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry
47 48
Figure 1. Inefficient use of pesticides caused a series of environment problems
49 50
Most of the pesticide active ingredients (AIs) are water-insoluble organic
51
compounds, which need to be added with carrier, solvent, emulsifier, dispersant and
52
other auxiliary ingredients, and processed into a suitable formulation in order to
53
facilitate the spray application in field11. The loss and decomposition rate of pesticide
54
on crop foliar is typically up to 70%, caused by run-off, spray drift and rolling down
55
during field application12,13. The actual utilization of biological target uptake is only
56
less than 0.1% after dust drift and rainwater leaching14,15 (Figure 2). The off-target
57
loss is the crucial problem for inefficient usage of conventional pesticide
58
formulations13,16. Wettable powder (WP) and emulsifiable concentrate (EC) are two
59
major conventional pesticide formulations. WP is a crushed powder pesticide
60
formulation composed of pesticide AIs, inert fillers and other additives. The inorganic
61
fillers in WP easily drift and run off into the environment, and the loaded AIs cannot
62
be completely released. In addition, the residual pesticides are difficult to be degraded.
63
EC is a liquid pesticide formulation. Pesticide AIs are dissolved in the solvent, added
64
with emulsifier, and then diluted into water to form a stable emulsion. The organic
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry
65
solvents and toxic ingredients directly leach and leak into the environment while
66
pesticide spraying, resulting serious pollutants in soil and water system, chemical
67
residues in crops and food products, and potential threat to human health17. These
68
environmental problems and health risks has aroused the universal concerns.
69
70 71
Figure 2. Low efficiency of conventional pesticide formulations
72 73
Nanotechnology represents a new impetus for sustainable agriculture
74
development, thus using nanotechnology to formulate nano-based smart formulation
75
for pesticides and nutrients by virtue of nanomaterials related properties has shown a
76
great potential for alleviation of these problems18-20. Nano-based smart formulation
77
could release their AIs in responding to environmental triggers and biological
78
demands more precisely through targeted delivery or controlled release mechanisms.
79
Developing new advanced nano-based formulations that remain stable and active in
80
the spray condition (sun, heat, rain), penetrate and delivery to the target, prolong the
81
effective duration, and reduce the run-off in environment, is one of the hotspots in the
82
field of nano-technical agriculture applications11,21,22. In 2003, United States
83
Department of Agriculture (USDA) firstly launched the Nanoscale Science and
84
Engineering for Agriculture and Food Systems Research Program, smart delivery
85
systems of agricultural chemicals was one of the key research directions23. In 2009,
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Page 4 of 30
Page 5 of 30
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry
86
Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) held the International Conference on Food
87
and Agriculture Applications of Nanotechnologies, and published a strategic research
88
report on the prospects of nanotechnologies in agriculture24. Recent years, United
89
States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and European Commission have
90
successively enacted rules on the management and usage of nanopesticides25,26. Bayer,
91
DuPont, Syngenta and other agrochemical enterprises also pay great attention to the
92
development of nano-based pesticide formulations, and some products has been
93
applied to crop production or plant protection24.
94 95
2. Nano-based pesticide formulation: properties and advantages
96
Nanotechnology involves manufacture, manipulation, and application of
97
ultrafine materials that have at least one size dimension in the order of 1-100nm27.
98
Particles
99
surface-to-volume ratio and unique optical properties at a critical length scale of less
100
than 100 nm11. However, because other phenomena (transparency, turbidity, stable
101
dispersion, etc.) that extend the upper limit are occasionally considered, a broader
102
definition of nano-based pesticide formulations is accepted as systems with
103
dimensions smaller than 500 nm, exhibit novel properties associated with their small
104
size19,28-30.
have
unique
properties
such
as
size-dependent
qualities,
high
105
Nanomaterials held great promise regarding their application in nano-based
106
pesticide formulation due to their small size, big surface area and target modified
107
properties. Nano-based formulation may bring beneficial improvements in properties
108
and behaviors of pesticides, such as solubility, dispersion, stability, mobility and
109
targeting delivery. Furthermore, it might significantly improve the efficacy, safety and
110
economic effects of traditional pesticides by increasing efficacy, extending effect
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry
111
duration, reducing dose required, providing capability to controlled release of active
112
ingredients, and improving stability of payloads from the environment; subsequently
113
diminishing run-off and environmental residuals (Figure 3).
114
115 116
Figure 3. Nano-based formulation brings beneficial improvements in pesticides properties
117 118
The size, shape, surface charge, crystal phase and the presence of different
119
modified functional groups of nanoparticles are critical factors in their application31. A
120
broad variety of natural or synthesized materials are used in construction of pesticide
121
nanoformulations, such as metal, metal oxides, non-metal oxides, carbon, silicates,
122
ceramics, clays, layered double hydroxides, polymers, lipids, dendrimers, proteins,
123
quantum dots, and so on32-36. Nano-pesticides may be developed by two pathways,
124
directly processing into nanoparticles (nanosized pesticides), and loading pesticides
125
with nano-carriers in delivery systems11. In nano-carrier systems, pesticides are
126
loaded through: encapsulation inside the nanoparticulate polymeric shell, absorption
127
onto the nanoparticle surface, attachment on the nanoparticle core via ligands, or
128
entrapment within the polymeric matrix (Figure 4).
129
A variety of nanoformulation types have been developed, including
130
nanoemulsions, nanocapsules, nanospheres, nanosuspensions, solid lipid nanoparticles,
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Page 6 of 30
Page 7 of 30
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry
nanoparticles,
and
nanoclays37-41.
131
mesoporous
Aqueous
nanoemulsion
and
132
nanosuspension of pesticides increase solubility of water insoluble AIs, eliminate the
133
toxic organic solvents, and would gradually substitute the conventionally EC
134
products42-44. Nanocapsule and nanosphere are suggested as vehicles for the
135
environmentally sensitive pesticides, due to their capability to slow release of AIs,
136
improve stability of formulation, prevent early degradation, and extend the longevity
137
of pesticides45-48. Mesoporous nanoparticles, such as nanoclay, activated carbon and
138
porous hollow silica are also verified to be suitable for the controlled release and
139
delivery systems for the water-soluble and fat-dispersible pesticides which possess
140
high drug-loading capacity, good biocompatibility, low toxicity and multistage release
141
pattern49,50.
142 143
Figure 4. Schematic diagram of nano-based pesticide formulation
144 145
3. Challenges and scientific issues
146
The mode of pesticide application influences their efficiency and environmental
147
impact51-53. Insect pests and pathogens are the targets of pesticides. However, it is
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry
148
extremely difficult to directly spray the pesticides on pests or pathogens. As a result,
149
the pesticides are sprayed on the crop foliage to form an effective toxic zone,
150
maintaining the toxic stress on the pests or pathogens. Currently spraying system of
151
pesticide application needs to focus on efficacy enhancement and spray drift
152
management11.
153
Most of the pesticide AIs are poorly soluble, or even insoluble in water. One of
154
the challenges associated with pesticide formulation is increasing their solubility and
155
dispersion in aqueous solution. In addition, the most of crop leaf surfaces are highly
156
hydrophobic which inhibits liquid deposition54,55. Thus another challenge is reducing
157
the spray drift and run-off loss on the hydrophobic foliage. As shown in Figure5,
158
size-down of pesticide particles benefit to significantly improve their water-dispersion,
159
targeting coverage and insecticidal activity due to smaller particle size and higher
160
surface area. In addition, Pesticide nanoformulations increase adhesion and deposition
161
of droplets on the leaves through leaf-affinity modification.
162
163 164
Figure 5. Size-down of pesticides increase bioavailability and efficiency
165 166
After spraying on the foliage, the pesticide droplets spread and adhere on the leaf
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Page 8 of 30
Page 9 of 30
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry
167
surfaces, and then the AIs deposite, release and transfer from the foliage to the pest or
168
pathogen targets, finally kill the insects or pathogens before degradation (Figure 6).
169
Therefore, water-dispersion, leaf-affinity, bio-availability and residues degradation are
170
the most critical factors regarding development of nano-based pesticide formulations.
171
Four key scientific issues for improvement of pesticide efficacy and safety are
172
proposed: (i) Construction of water-based dispersion pesticide nanoformulation; (ii)
173
Mechanism on leaf-targeted deposition and dose transfer of pesticide nano-delivery
174
system; (iii) Mechanism on increased bioavailability of nano-based pesticide
175
formulation; and (iv) Impacts of nanoformulation on natural degradation and
176
bio-safety of pesticide residues.
177
178 179
Figure 6. Four critical factors regarding development of nano-based pesticide formulations
180 181
4. Construction of water-based dispersion pesticide nanoformulation
182
The fundamental limitation with the use of current pesticides is that they are
183
generally comprised of virtually insoluble compounds57. This lack of solubility
184
requires the addition of large amounts of organic solvents for dissolution and spraying
185
application in field, which increases costs, applicators' exposures and environmental
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry
186
pollutants58. Water-based dispersion pesticide nanoformulations improve the solubility
187
and dispersion in water, uniform leaf coverage, biological efficacy and environmental
188
compatibility, due to the small particle size, high surface area and elimination of
189
organic solvents in comparison to conventionally formulations58-60.
190
Synthesis of nano-based formulations involve size reduction by top-down
191
methods such as milling, high pressure homogenization and sonication, while
192
bottom-up processes involve meltdispersion, solvent displacement, complex
193
coacervation, interfacial polymerization, and emulsion diffusion13, 61. Nanocapsules,
194
nanoemulsions, nanospheres, nanomicelles, and nanosuspensions show great potential
195
for improving formulation properties, such as water-dispersion, chemical stability,
196
targeting adhesion, permeability and controlled release (Figure 7).
197
198 199
Figure 7. Schematic representation of water-based dispersion pesticide nanoformulation
200 201
Nanocapsules are core−shell structural vesicular systems, encapsulating the
202
pesticide AIs in the inner core. The shell is usually composed of biodegradable
203
polymeric, including poly-ε-caprolactone (PCL), polylactic acid (PLA), polyglycolic
204
acid (PGA), poly (lactic-co-glycolic) acid (PLGA), polyethylene glycol (PEG),
205
chitosan, and etc62-69. The polymeric shell degrades slowly in the environment, thus
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Page 10 of 30
Page 11 of 30
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry
206
improves chemical stability for environment-sensitive compounds (i.e., UV
207
degradation and soil degradation). In addition, nanocapsules can increase the targeting
208
delivery efficiency with membranal polymeric leaf-affinity modification, improving
209
the behaviors of wetting, spreading and absorbing of droplets on leaves.
210
Nanoemulsions are oil-in-water (O/W) emulsions where the pesticides are dis-
211
persed as nanosized droplets in water, and the surfactant molecules localized at the
212
pesticide-water interface71-73. Nanoemulsions improve the efficacy and safety effects
213
of traditional pesticides, due to the small size effect, high dissolution rate and
214
elimination of toxic organic solvents.
215
Nanospheres are solid sphere vesicular systems where the pesticides are
216
uniformly distributed through adsorption or entrapment inside the nano-matrix74-77.
217
Nanospheres are composed of organic polymer materials or inorganic mesoporous
218
materials, such as activated carbon, non-metal oxides and porous hollow silica.
219
Nanospheres possess high drug-loading capacity, good biocompatibility and
220
slow/controlled release pattern, showing great potential in soil infection disease and
221
soil pest control78-80.
222
Nanomicelles are ideal bioactive smart nano delivery systems for encapsulating
223
pesticides. Nanomicelles can be induced by the external environment, and thus make
224
the corresponding changes in physical and chemical properties. For example, based
225
on the hydrogen bonding cross-linked nanomicelle, an environment-responsive
226
controlled release system was constructed. Under high temperature and high humidity
227
conditions, the hydrogen bonding fractured, the nanomicelle swelled and the
228
pesticides were released. The pesticides were blocked under low temperature and low
229
humidity conditions the other way round81.
230
Naonosuspensions are pesticide nanoparticles uniformly suspended in water. The
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry
231
aqueous colloid dispersion systems render higher solubility and dispersion for
232
insoluble or fat-dispersible compounds in solution, improve the pesticide
233
bioavailability, and reduce the costs due to the ease to large-scale manufacture.
234 235
5. Mechanism on leaf-targeted deposition and dose transfer of pesticide
236
nano-delivery system
237
The pesticide spray application on foliage is inadequate due to the weak adhesion
238
to the crop foliage. For the spray pesticides, pesticides are firstly deposited on crop
239
foliage, and then they go to parts of the plant attacked by a pest through diffusion,
240
uptake and/or transfer processes, leading to pest poisoning or death by active or
241
passive contact13, 82. Consequently, leaf hydrophobicity and pesticide droplet retention
242
are key parameters affecting the effective utilization of pesticides. As shown in Figure
243
8, the pesticide droplet forms a spherical shape, minimizing contact with the
244
hydrophobic foliage, poorly wetting and spreading on the waxy layer, and resulting in
245
loss as rolling down and run-off. After water evaporation, the residual pesticide
246
particles easily drift or fall off from the leaves, since the particles are too large to
247
embed in the microstructured or nanostructured mastoids of leaf surfaces.
248
Nano-delivery systems form stable dispersions, increase the efficiency, and
249
improve the wetting and spreading behavior on leaf surface, due to the leaf-affinity
250
modification of pesticides. In addition, the pesticide nanoparticles deposite and adhere
251
favorably on the surface of foliage, leading to increased retention rate and decreased
252
spraying dosage (Figure 8). The adhesion properties of nano-based formulation were
253
achieved by the multimodal interactions between the nanoparticles and the crop
254
foliage, such as hydrogen bonding, electrostatic attraction and covalent bonding83.
255
The adhesion strength strongly depended on the size distribution of nanoparticles and
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Page 12 of 30
Page 13 of 30
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry
256
the functional groups on the nanoparticle surface, and was easily regulated by size
257
controlling and varying functional groups82. Carboxyl-modified nanocapsules reduced
258
the surface tension of pesticide dispersions, decreased the contact angle of droplet on
259
hydrophobic foliage, and improved the retention rate84,85. Additionally, increased leaf
260
coverage, improved diffusion properties, and penetration into plants were
261
observed47,86.
262
263 264
Figure 8. Pesticide deposition efficiency and dose transfer mechanism
265 266
6. Mechanism on increased bioavailability of nano-based pesticide formulation
267
Compared with the traditional pesticide formulation, nano-based formulations
268
have smaller particle size and larger specific surface area, which can effectively
269
increase the coverage, adhesion and permeability of the pest. In addition, nano-based
270
formulations may affect the action modes and the transfer paths of conventional
271
pesticides by introducing insect-target modification and enhancing release of AIs
272
(Figure 9). Pesticides can be classified according to four distinctive functions:
273
stomach poisoning, the pesticide enters the body of pests via their mouthpart and
274
digestive system; inhalation poisoning, pesticides enters the body of pests via fluids
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry
275
from a consumed host organism; contact poisoning, the pesticide enters the body of
276
pests via their epidermis upon contact; and fumigation, the pesticide in gas form
277
enters the body of pests via their respiration system. It was presumed that nano-based
278
formulation might enhance the stomach poisoning and contact poisoning functions,
279
since it significantly improve the dispersal and permeability, and thus increase the rate
280
of pesticide entering pest bodies87,88. Furthermore, the enhancement of the transport,
281
conduction and transformation efficiency of pesticide nanoparticles inside pests can
282
accelerate pests poisoning, further improve the efficacy, bioactivity and dose effect of
283
pesticides89.
284
285 286
Figure 9. Bioavailability of pesticide nano-delivery system
287 288
7. Impacts of nanoformulation on degradation and bio-safety
289
Inevitably, nanoparticles will be released into the plants and the environment system.
290
The unique physical and chemical properties of nanoparticles might cause some
291
unpredictable adverse effects on crops, agricultural products and ecosystem90-93. In
292
addition, these materials will accumulate over time in soils and rates may vary in
293
response to unknown parameters94,95. The general concern is that some nanoparticles or
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Page 14 of 30
Page 15 of 30
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry
294
nanostructured materials may flow into the environmental systems and food chain, which
295
may become a new class of pollutant resources that threaten human health and ecosystem
296
balance. However, because farmland is an open complicated system with many
297
influencing factors of complicated functions, actual data measuring environmental
298
concentration of nanoformulations in various media is scarce96-98. The environmental fate
299
and
300
nanoformulations is also unclear99. Therefore, avoiding risk research should be conducted
301
on safety and risk assessments of nanopesticides according to the methodologies
302
established in nanotoxicology and nanomedicine. Investigating the toxicological effect,
303
environmental behavior, and pharmacokinetics of nanoparticles, studying the interaction
304
mechanism between nanoparticles and plants, and evaluating their potential impact on the
305
quality and safety of agricultural products can provide a theoretical basis for the
306
development of nanopesticides and the sustainable implementation of nanotechnology in
307
agriculture (Figure 10). On the other hand, nano-based pesticide formulation can
308
accelerate the catalytic degradation of toxic residues and reduce the pesticide residues in
309
environment by introducing bio-degradable material carriers and photocatalysts100.
potential
bio-safety
problem
of
nanomaterials
or
nanoparticles
310
311 312
Figure 10. Catalytic degradation and bio-safety of pesticide residues
313
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
from
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry
314
8. Conclusion and prospects
315
Clearly, nano-based pesticide formulations have many advantages over the
316
conventional equivalents such as high efficiency, environment friendliness,
317
high-targeting delivery and smart controlled release. Due to the technological
318
advancement, large scale applications of nanopesticides in crop production have just
319
become possible. These are the desired properties and research objectives of
320
nano-based pesticide formulations as summarized in Table 1.
321 322
Table 1. Desired properties and research objectives of nano-based pesticide
323
formulations Desirable Properties
Research objectives of Nanopesticieds-Enabled Technologies Increasing targeted delivery efficiency of pesticide into action
Targeted delivery
targets, such as plants, insects, pathogen16,17,24,27,30 . Controlling release of pesticide at least effective concentration for
Controlled release
killing pests and pathogens30,37,46-50,84,85,101,102. Increasing solubility and dispersion for fat-soluble chemicals in
Water dispersion
aqueous solution40,43-4556,59,70-73. Improving chemical stability for light-sensitive compounds by
Chemical stability
Bioavailability
restricting photo-degradation46,70-83,86. Increasing bioavailability for saving pesticides89,99. Reducing pesticides application and treatment frequency by
Lasting validity period
Lower toxicity
extended lasting validity period80,82,83,86. Protecting biodiversity in ecosystem16,17,24. Reducing food residues and non-point source pollution due to the
Environmental friendliness minimum pesticide loss29,30,41,53. 324 325
In conclusion, nano-based pesticide formulations bring beneficial improvements
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Page 16 of 30
Page 17 of 30
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry
326
in properties and behaviour of traditional pesticides such as solubility, dispersion,
327
stability, and targeting delivery, controlled release of active ingredients. Additionally,
328
it might not only significantly improve the bioavailability and the duration of drug
329
efficacy, but also reduce the toxicity of non-target wildlife, the food and
330
environmental residual. On the other hand, some toxic nanoparticles from pesticides
331
may flow into the environment and food systems threaten human health and
332
ecosystem balance. Avoiding risk research should be conducted on safety and risk
333
assessments of nanopesticides according to the methodologies established in
334
nanotoxicology and nanomedicine. Safer and bio-degradable nanomaterials should be
335
developed for nanopesticides production. As a most promising and attractive field of
336
nanotechnology application in agriculture, these novel agrochemical products will
337
provide multiple benefits such as reduced use of chemicals and subsequently reduced
338
water pollution and food product residual contamination, efficient use of agricultural
339
resources, increased soil and environmental qualities.
340 341
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry
342
REFERENCES
343 344
1. What is a pesticide? U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2007.
345
2. International Code of Conduct on the Distribution and Use of Pesticides. Food and
346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356
Agriculture Organization, 2007. 3. Lamberth, C.; Jeanmart, S.; Luksch, T.; Plant, A. Current challenges and trends in the discovery of agrochemicals. Science, 2013, 341, 742-746. 4. Grube, A.; Donaldson, D.; Kiely, T.; Wu, L. Pesticides Industry Sales and Usage, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2011. 5. Bradberry, S. M.; Proudfoot, A. T.; Vale, J. A. Poisoning Due to Chlorophenoxy Herbicides. Toxicol. Rev., 2004, 23, 65-73. 6. Worek, F.; Koller, M.; Thiermann, H.; Szinicz, L. Diagnostic aspects of organophosphate poisoning. Toxicol., 2005, 214,182. 7. Eyer, P. The role of oximes in the management of organophosphorus pesticide poisoning. Toxicol. Rev., 2003, 22, 165-190.
357
8. Fenner, K.; Canonica, S.; Wackett, L. P.; Elsner, M. Evaluating pesticide
358
degradation in the environment: blind spots and emerging opportunities. Science,
359
2013, 341, 752-758.
360
9. Malaj, E.; Pc, V. D. O.; Grote, M.; Kühne, R.; Mondy, C. P.; Usseglio-Polatera, P.;
361
Brack, W.; Schafer, R. F. Organic chemicals jeopardize the health of freshwater
362
ecosystems on the continental scale. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A., 2014, 111,
363
9549-9554.
364 365 366
10. Köhler, H. R.; Triebskorn, R. Wildlife ecotoxicology of pesticides: can we track effects to the population level and beyond? Science, 2013, 341, 759-765. 11. Ghormade, V.; Deshpande, M. V.; Paknikar, K. M. Perspectives for
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Page 18 of 30
Page 19 of 30
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry
367
nano-biotechnology enabled protection and nutrition of plants. Biotechnol. Adv.,
368
2011, 29, 792-803.
369
12. Song, M.; Ju, J.; Luo, S.; Han, Y.; Dong, Z.; Wang, Y.; Gu, Z; Zhang, L.; Hao, R.;
370
Jiang, L. Controlling liquid splash on superhydrophobic surfaces by a vesicle
371
surfactant. Sci. Adv., 2017, 3, e1602188.
372
13. Nuruzzaman, M.; Rahman, M. M.; Liu, Y.; Naidu, R. Nanoencapsulation,
373
nano-guard for pesticides: a new window for safe application. J. Agr. Food Chem.,
374
2016, 64, 1447.
375
14. Massinon, M.; Cock, N. D.; Forster, W. A.; Nairn, J. J.; Mccue, S. W.; Zabkiewicz,
376
J. A.; Lebeau, F. Spray droplet impaction outcomes for different plant species and
377
spray formulations. Crop Prot., 2017, 99, 65-75.
378 379
15. He, Y.; Zhao, B.; Yu, Y. Effect, comparison and analysis of pesticide electrostatic spraying and traditional spraying. Bulg. Chem. Commun., 2016, 48, 340-344.
380
16. Pandey, S.; Giri, K.; Kumar, R.; Mishra, G.; Rishi, R. R. Nanopesticides:
381
opportunities in crop protection and associated environmental risks. Proc. Natl.
382
Acad. Sci. India, 2016, 1-22.
383 384 385 386
17. John, H.; Lucas, J.; Clare, W.; Dusan, L. Nanopesticides: a review of current research and perspectives. New Pestic. Soil Sens., 2017, 193–225. 18. Margaret, A. H. FDA’s Approach to Regulation of Products of Nanotechnology.
Science, 2012, 336, 299-300.
387
19. Jeff, M.; Jim, W.; Domenico, M.; Bjorn, H.; Henrik, L.; Juan, R. S.; Peter, K.; Mar,
388
G. Science policy considerations for responsible nanotechnology decisions. Nat.
389
Nanotechnol., 2011, 6, 73-77.
390 391
20. Scott, N.; Chen, H. Nanoscale Science and Engineering for Agriculture and Food Systems. Ind. Biotechnol., 2012, 8, 340-343.
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry
392 393 394 395
Page 20 of 30
21. Smith, K.; Evans, D.A.; El-Hiti, G.A. Role of modern chemistry in sustainable arable crop protection. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. B, 2008, 363, 623–637. 22. Nanotechnologies for nutrient & biocide delivery in agricultural production. Observatory NANO, Working Paper Version, 2010.
396
23. Scott, N.; Chen, H.; Corinne, J. R. Nanoscale Science and Engineering for
397
Agriculture and Food Systems: A Report Submitted to Cooperative State Research,
398
Education and Extension Service. The United States Department of Agriculture:
399
National Planning Workshop, November 18-19, 2002, Washington, D. C., 2003.
400
24.
International
Conference
on
Food
and
Agriculture
Applications
of
401
Nanotechnologies: Report of Technical Round Table Sessions; Food and
402
Agriculture Organization: São Pedro, Brazil, 2010.
403
25. FAO/WHO expert meeting on the application of nanotechnologies in the food and
404
agriculture sectors: Potential food safety implications; World Health Organization:
405
Geneva, Switzerland, 2009.
406 407
26.
EPA’s
new
proposed
policy
for
nanotechnology
in
pesticides.
http://www.epa.gov/pesticides/regulating/nanotechnology.html.(06/09/2011)
408
27. Auffan, M.; Rose, J.; Bottero, J-Y.; Lowry, G.V.; Jolivet, J.P.; Wiesner, M.R.
409
Towards a definition of inorganic nanoparticles from an environmental, health and
410
safety perspective. Nat. Nanotechnol., 2009, 4, 634.
411
28. Alemán, J.; Chadwick, A.V.; He, J.; Hess, M.; Horie, K.; Jones, R.G.; Kratochvil,
412
P.; Meisel, I.; Mita, I.; Moad, G.; Penczek, S.; Stepto, R.F.T. Definitions of Terms
413
Relating to the Structure and Processing of Sols, Gels, Networks and
414
Inorganic-Organic Hybrid Materials.
415
Chem., 2007, 79, 1801.
416
IUPAC Recommendations. Pure Appl.
29. Kah, M.; Beulke, S.; Tiede, K.; Hofmann, T. Nanopesticides: state of knowledge,
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Page 21 of 30
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry
417
environmental fate, and exposure modeling. Crit. Rev. Env. Sci. Technol., 2013, 43,
418
1823-1867.
419 420
30. Kah, M.; Hofmann T. Nanopesticide research: Current trends and future priorities.
Environ. Int., 2014, 63, 224.
421
31. Zhao, X.; Cui, H.; Chen, W.; Wang, Y.; Cui, B.; Sun, C.; Meng, Z.; Liu, G.
422
Morphology, structure and function characterization of PEI modified magnetic
423
nanoparticles gene delivery system. Plos One, 2014, 9, e98919.
424
32. Niemeyer, B.A.; Bergs, C.; Wissenbach, U.; Flockerzi, V.; Trost, C. Competitive
425
regulation of CaT-like-mediated Ca2+entry by protein kinase Cand calmodulin.
426
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A., 2001, 98, 3600–3605.
427 428 429 430
33. Oskam, G. Met oxide nanoparticles: synthesis, characterization and application. J.
Sol-Gel Sci. Technol., 2006, 37, 161–164. 34. Perez-de-Luque, A.; Rubiales, D. Nanotechnology for parasitic plant control. Pest
Manag. Sci., 2009, 65, 540–545.
431
35. Gogos, A.; Knauer, K.; Bucheli, T. Nanomaterials in plant protection and
432
fertilization: current state, foreseen applications, and research priorities. J. Agr.
433
Food Chem., 2012, 60, 9781–9792.
434
36. Khot, L.R.; Sankaran, S.; Maja, J. M.; Ehsani, R.; Schuster, E. Application of
435
nanomaterials in agricultural production and crop protection: a review. Crop Prot.,
436
2012, 35, 64–70.
437
37. Ao, M.; Zhu, Y.; He, S.; Li, D.; Li, P.; Li, J.; Cao., Y. Preparation and
438
characterization of 1-naphthylacetic acid-silica conjugated nanospheres for
439
enhancement of controlled-release performance. Nanotechnology, 2013, 24,
440
035601.
441
38. Wang, L.; Li, X.; Zhang, G.; Dong, J.; Eastoe, J. Oil-in-water nanoemulsions for
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry
442 443 444
pesticide formulations. J. Colloid Interf. Sci., 2007, 314, 230-235. 39. Francesco, P.; Francesca, I.; Umile, G. S.; Giuseppe, C.; Manuela, C.; Nevio, P. Polymer in Agriculture: a Review. Am. J. Agr. Biol. Sci., 2008, 3, 299-314.
445
40. Henrik, K.; Frederiksen, G.; Kristensen, K.; Morten, P. Solid lipid microparticle
446
formulations of the pyrethroid gamma-cyhalothrin-incompatibility of the lipid and
447
the pyrethroid and biological properties of the formulations. J. Controlled Release,
448
2003, 86, 243-252.
449
41. Guan, H.; Chi, D.; Yu, J.; Li, H. Dynamics of residues from a novel
450
nanoimidacloprid formulation in soyabean fields. Crop Prot., 2010, 29, 942-946.
451
42. Zhang, H.; Wang, D.; Butler, R.; Neil, L. C.; Long, J.; Tan, B.; David, J. D.; Foster,
452
A. J.; Hopkinson, A.; Taylor, D.; Angus, D.; Cooper, A. I.; Steven P. R. Formation
453
and enhanced biocidal activity of water-dispersable organic nanoparticles. Nat.
454
Nanotechnol., 2008, 3, 506-511.
455 456
43. Rabinow, B. E. Nanosuspensions in drug delivery. Nat. Rev. Drug Disc., 2004, 3, 785-796.
457
44. Liu, Y.; Wei, F.; Wang, Y.; Zhu, G. Studies on the formation of bifenthrin
458
oil-in-water nano-emulsions prepared with mixed surfactants. Colloid Surf. A, 2011,
459
389, 90-96.
460 461
45. Shang, Q., Feng, S., Zheng, H. Preparation of abamectin nanocapsules suspension concentrate. Agrochemicals, 2006, 45, 831-833.
462
46. Liu, Y.; Laks, P.; Heiden, P. Controlled release of biocides in solid wood. III.
463
preparation and characterization of surfactant-free nanoparticles. J. Appl. Polym.
464
Sci., 2002, 86, 615-621.
465
47. Boehm, A.L.; Martinon, I.; Zerrouk, R.; Rump, E.; Fessi, H. Nanoprecipitation
466
technique for the encapsulation of agrochemical active ingredients. J.
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Page 22 of 30
Page 23 of 30
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry
467
Microencapsul., 2003, 20, 433-441.
468
48. Qian, K.; Shi, T.; Tang, T.; Zhang, S.; Liu, X.; Cao, Y. Microchim preparation and
469
characterization of nano-sized calcium carbonate as controlled release pesticide
470
carrier for validamycin against rhizoctonia solani. Microchim. Acta,2011, 173,
471
51-57.
472 473
49. Wang, Q.; O’Hare, D. Recent advances in the synthesis and application of layered double hydroxide (LDH) nanosheets. Chem. Rev., 2012, 112, 4124−4155.
474
50. Li, Z.; Xu, S.; Wen, L.; Liu, F.; Liu, A.; Wang, Q.; Sun, H.; Yu, W.; Chen, J.
475
Controlled release of avermectin from porous hollow silica nanoparticles: influence
476
of shell thickness on loading efficiency, UV-shielding property and release. J.
477
Controlled Release, 2006, 111, 81-88.
478
51. Ihsan, M.; Mahmood, A.; Mian, M. A.; Cheema, N. M. Effect of different methods
479
of fertilizer application to wheat after germination under rainfed conditions. J. Agr.
480
Res., 2007, 45, 277-281.
481 482 483 484 485 486 487 488 489 490 491
52. Matthews, G. A. Developments in application technology. Environmentalist, 2008,
28, 19–24. 53. Matthews, G. A.; Thomas, N. Working towards more efficient application of Pesticides. Pest Manag. Sci., 2000, 56, 974-976. 54. Neinhuis, C.; Barthlott, W. Characterization and distribution of water-repellent, self-cleaning plant surfaces. Ann. Bot., 1997, 79, 667-677. 55. Zachary, B.; Bharat, B. Surface characterization and adhesion and friction properties of hydrophobic leaf surfaces. Ultramicroscopy, 2006, 106, 709-719. 56. Whitehouse, P.; Rannard, S. The application of nanodispersions to agriculture.
Outlook. Pest Manag., 2010, 21, 190-192. 57. Stackelberg, P. E.; Kauffman, L. J.; Ayers, M. A.; Baehr, A. L. Frequently
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry
492
co-occurring pesticides and volatile organic compounds in public supply and
493
monitoring wells, southern New Jersey, USA. Environ. Toxicol. Chem., 2001, 20,
494
853–865.
495
58. Lawrence, M. J.; Warisnoicharoen, W. Recent advances in microemulsions as drug
496
delivery vehicles. In Nanoparticles as drug carriers; Torchilin, V.P., Ed.; Imperial
497
College Press: London, U.K., 2006.
498 499
59. Pratap, A. P.; Bhowmick, D. N. Pesticides as microemulsion formulations. J.
Dispersion Sci. Technol., 2008, 29, 1325–1330.
500
60. Anton, N.; Benoit, J.-P.; Saulnier, P. Design and production of nanoparticles
501
formulated from nano-emulsion templates-a review. J. Controlled Release, 2008,
502
128, 185−199.
503
61. Sasson, Y.; Levy-Ruso, G.; Toledano, O.; Ishaaya, I. Nanosuspensions: emerging
504
novel agrochemical formulations. In: Ishaaya I, Nauen R, Horowitz AR, editors.
505
Insecticides design using advanced technologies Netherlands: Springer-Verlag;
506
2007: 1–32.
507
62. Cao, Y.; Tan, H.; Shi, T.; Tang, T.; Li, J. Preparation of Ag-doped TiO2
508
nanoparticles for photocatalytic degradation of acetamiprid in water. J. Chem.
509
Technol. Biotechnol., 2008, 83, 546-552.
510
63. Wang, S.; Xie, S.; Zhu, L.; Wang, F.; Zhou, W. Effects of PLGA as a co-emulsifier
511
on the preparation and hypoglycemic activity of insulin-loaded solid lipid
512
nanoparticles. IET Nanobiotechnol., 2009, 4, 103-108.
513
64. Xie, S.; Wang, S.; Zhao, B.; Han, C.; Wang, M. Effect of PLGA as a polymeric
514
emulsifier on preparation of hydrophilic protein-loaded solid lipid nanoparticles.
515
Colloid Surf. B, 2008, 67, 199-204.
516
65. Sinha, V. R.; Bansal, K.; Kaushik, R.; Kumria, R.; Trehan, A. Poly-ε-caprolactone
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Page 24 of 30
Page 25 of 30
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry
517
microspheres and nanospheres: an overview. Int. J. Pharm., 2004, 278, 1−23.
518
66. Pereira, A. E. S., Grillo, R., Mello, N. F. S., Rosa, A. H., Fraceto, L. F. Application
519
of poly(epsilon-caprolactone) nanoparticles containing atrazine herbicide as an
520
alternative technique to control weeds and reduce damage to the environment. J.
521
Hazard. Mater., 2014, 268, 207−215.
522 523
67. Campos, E. V. R.; Oliveira, J. L.; Fraceto, L. F. Singh, B. Polysaccharides as safer release systems for agrochemicals. Agron. Sustain. Dev., 2015, 35, 47−66.
524
68. Wu, Y.; Zheng, Y.; Yang, W.; Wang, C.; Hu, J.; Fu, S. Synthesis and
525
characterization of a novel amphiphilic chitosan−polylactide graft copolymer.
526
Carbohydr. Polym., 2005, 59, 165−171.
527
69. Li, M.; Huang, Q.; Wu, Y. A novel chitosan-poly(lactide) copolymer and its
528
submicron particles as imidacloprid carriers. Pest Manag. Sci., 2011, 67, 831−836.
529
70. Anjali, C. H.; Sharma, Y.; Mukherjee, A.; Chandrasekaran, N. Neem oil
530
(Azadirachta indica) nanoemulsion - a potent larvicidal agent against Culex
531
quinquefasciatus. Pest Manag. Sci., 2012, 68, 158−163.
532
71. Mason, T. G.; Wilking, J.; Meleson, K.; Chang, C.; Graves, S. Nanoemulsions:
533
formation, structure, and physical properties. J. Phys. Condens. Matter, 2006, 18,
534
R635−R666.
535 536 537 538
72. Koroleva, M. Y.; Yurtov, E. V. Nanoemulsions: the properties, methods of preparation and promising applications. Russ. Chem. Rev., 2012, 81, 21. 73. Wang, L.; Li, X.; Zhang, G.; Dong, J.; Eastoe, J. Oil-in-water nanoemulsions for pesticide formulations. J. Colloid Interf. Sci., 2007, 314, 230−235.
539
74. Polshettiwar, V.; Cha, D.; Zhang, X.; Basset, J. M. Highsurface-area silica
540
nanospheres (KCC-1) with a fibrous morphology. Angew. Chem. Int. Ed., 2010, 49,
541
9652−9656.
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry
542 543 544 545
75. He, D.; Wang, S.; Lei, L.; Hou, Z.; Shang, P.; He, X.; Nie, H. Core−shell particles for controllable release of drug. Chem. Eng. Sci., 2015, 125, 108−120. 76. Wu, S.-H.; Mou, C.-Y.; Lin, H.-P. Synthesis of mesoporous silica nanoparticles.
Chem. Soc. Rev., 2013, 42, 3862−3875.
546
77. Li, Z.; Chen, J.; Liu, F.; Liu, A.; Wang, Q.; Sun, H.; Wen, L. Study of UV‐
547
shielding properties of novel porous hollow silica nanoparticle carriers for
548
avermectin. Pest Manag. Sci., 2007, 63, 241-246.
549 550
78. Tang, F.; Li, L.; Chen, D. Mesoporous silica nanoparticles: synthesis, biocompatibility and drug delivery. Adv. Mater., 2012, 24, 1504−1534.
551
79. Popat, A.; Liu, J.; Hu, Q.; Kennedy, M.; Peters, B.; Lu, G. Q.; Qiao, S. Z.
552
Adsorption and release of biocides with mesoporous silica nanoparticles.
553
Nanoscale, 2012, 4, 970−975.
554 555
80. Wanyika, H. Sustained release of fungicide metalaxyl by mesoporous silica nanospheres. J. Nanopart. Res., 2013, 15, 1831.
556
81. Botian, L. I.; Tang, L.; Qiu, Y.; Wang, Y. Uncommon melt rheological behavior of
557
hyperbranched polymers bearing quadruple hydrogen bonding units. Acta Polym.
558
Sin., 2009, 6, 581-585.
559
82. Yu, M.; Yao, J.; Liang, J.; Zeng, Z.; Cui, B.; Zhao, X.; Sun, C.; Wang, Y.; Liu, G.;
560
Cui, H. Development of functionalized abamectin poly(lactic acid) nanoparticles
561
with regulatable adhesion to enhance foliar retention. RSC Adv., 2017, 7, 11271–
562
11280.
563
83. Jia, X.; Sheng, W. B.; Li, W.; Tong, Y. B.; Liu, Z. Y.; Zhou, F. Adhesive
564
polydopamine coated avermectin microcapsules for prolonging foliar pesticide
565
retention. ACS Appl. Mater. Inter., 2014, 6, 19552.
566
84. Liu, B.; Wang, Y.; Yang, F.; Wang, X.; Shen, H.; Cui, H. Construction of a
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Page 26 of 30
Page 27 of 30
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry
567
controlled-release delivery system for pesticides using biodegradable PLA-based
568
microcapsules. Colloid. Surface. B, 2016, 144, 38.
569
85. Li, D.; Liu, B.; Yang, F.; Wang, X.; Shen, H.; Wu, D. Preparation of uniform
570
starch microcapsules by premix membrane emulsion for controlled release of
571
avermectin. Carbohydr. Polym., 2016, 136, 341-349.
572
86. Cameron, N.M.S.; Mitchell, M.E. Nanoscale: issues and perspectives for the nano
573
century. In The potential environmental hazards of nanotechnology and the
574
applicability of the existing low; Kimbrell, G.A.,Ed.; Wiley: Hoboken, New Jersey,
575
2007.
576
87. Lossbroek, T. G.; Ouden, H. D. Tests with a solid solution of permethrin in a
577
degradable polymer formulation as stomach and contact poison on mamestra
578
brassicae (lep. noctuidae) and calandra granaria (col. curculionidae). J. Appl.
579
Ent., 1988, 105, 355-359.
580
88. Yang, D.; Cui, B.; Wang, C.; Zhao, X.; Zeng, Z.; Wang, Y.; Sun, C.; Liu, G.; Cui,
581
H. Preparation and Characterization of Emamectin Benzoate Solid Nanodispersion.
582
J. Nanomater., 2017, Article ID 6560780.
583
89. Liu, X.; He, B.; Xu, Z.; Yin, M.; Yang, W.; Zhang, H.; Cao, J.; Shen, J. A
584
functionalized fluorescent dendrimer as a pesticide nanocarrier: application in pest
585
control. Nanoscale, 2015, 7, 445-449.
586
90. Service, R. F. Nanomaterials show signs of toxicity. Science, 2003, 300, 243.
587
91. Brumfiel, G. A little knowledge. Nature, 2003, 424, 246.
588
92. Zhang, W. Environmental technologies at the nanoscale. Environ. Sci. Technol.,
589
2003, 37, 103-108.
590
93. Kelly, K. L. Nanotechnology grows up. Science, 2004, 304, 1732-17345.
591
94. Boxall, A. B.; Tiede, K.; Chaudhry, Q. Engineered nanomaterials in soils and
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry
592
water: how do they behave and could they pose a risk to human health?
593
Nanomedicine, 2007, 2, 919-927.
594
95. Gottschalk, F.; Sonderer, T.; Scholz, R. W.; Nowack, B. Modeled environmental
595
concentrations of engineered nanomaterials (TiO2, ZnO, Ag, CNT, fullerenes) for
596
different regions. Environ. Sci. Technol., 2009, 43, 9216-9222.
597
96. Bai, W.; Zhang, C. C.; Jiang, W. J.; Zhang, Z. Y. Progress in Studies on
598
Environmental Behaviors and Toxicological Effects of Nanomaterials. Asian J.
599
Ecotoxicol., 2009, 4, 174-182.
600 601
97. Mueller, N. C.; Nowack B. Exposure modeling of engineered nanoparticles in the environment. Environ. Sci. Technol., 2008, 42, 4447-4453.
602
98. Gottschalk, F.; Sun, T. Y.; Nowack, B. Environmental concentrations of
603
engineered nanomaterials: review of modeling and analytical studies. Environ.
604
Pollut., 2013, 181, 287-300.
605
99. Klaine, S. J.; Alvarez, P. J. J.; Batley, G. E.; Fernandes, T. F.; Handy, R. D.; Lyon,
606
D. Y.; McLaughlin, M. J.; Lead, J. R. Nanomaterials in the environment: behavior,
607
fate, bioavailability, and effects. Environ. Toxicol. Chem., 2008, 27, 1825-1851.
608
100. Pierluigi, C.; Robert, E. S.; John, E. C. Phenylpyrazole insecticide
609
photochemistry, metabolism and GABAergic action: ethiprole compared with
610
fipronil. J. Agri. Food Chem., 2003, 51, 7055-7061.
611
101. Sarkar, D. J.; Kumar, J.; Shakil, N. A.; Walia, S. Release kinetics of controlled
612
release formulations of thiamethoxam employing nano-ranged amphiphilic PEG
613
and diacid based block polymers in soil. J. Environ. Sci. Health A, 2012, 47,
614
1701-1712.
615
102. Pankaj; Shakil, N. A.; Kumar, J.; Singh, M. K.; Singh, K. Bioefficacy evaluation
616
of controlled release formulations based on amphiphilic nano-polymer of
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Page 28 of 30
Page 29 of 30
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry
617
carbofuran against meloidogyne incognita infecting tomato. J. Environ. Sci. Health
618
B, 2012, 47, 520-528.
619 620
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
621
This paper was supported by the Major National Scientific Research Program of
622
China (2014CB932200), the National Key Research and Development Program of
623
China (2017YFD0500900, 2016YFD0200500), and the Agricultural Science and
624
Technology Innovation Program (CAAS-XTCX2016004).
625
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry
626
Graphic for table of contents
627
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Page 30 of 30