Subscriber access provided by Queen Mary, University of London
Article
Zein Nanoparticles Uptake and Translocation in Hydroponically Grown Sugarcane Plants Alisha Prasad, Carlos E Astete, Andreea Elena Bodoki, McKenzie Windham, Ede Bodoki, and Cristina M. Sabliov J. Agric. Food Chem., Just Accepted Manuscript • DOI: 10.1021/acs.jafc.7b02487 • Publication Date (Web): 02 Aug 2017 Downloaded from http://pubs.acs.org on August 3, 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
Zein Nanoparticles Uptake and Translocation in Hydroponically
2
Grown Sugarcane Plants
3 4
Alisha Prasada, Carlos E. Astetea, Andreea E. Bodokib, McKenzie Windhama, Ede Bodokic*, and
5
Cristina. M. Sabliova*
6 7
a
8
Agricultural and Mechanical College, and LSU AgCenter, Baton Rouge, LA 70803, USA
Department of Biological and Agricultural Engineering, Louisiana State University
9 10
b
11
University of Medicine and Pharmacy, 12, Ion Creanga St., 400010, Cluj-Napoca, Romania
General and Inorganic Chemistry Department, Faculty of Pharmacy, “Iuliu Hatieganu”
12 13
c
14
Medicine and Pharmacy, 4, Louis Pasteur St., 400349, Cluj-Napoca, Romania
15 16
* Co-corresponding authors
Analytical Chemistry Department, Faculty of Pharmacy, “Iuliu Hatieganu” University of
17 18
Key words: Zein nanoparticles, sugarcane, translocation, nanopesticides, zein-FITC
19 20
Abstract
21
The main objective of this study was to investigate the uptake and translocation of positively
22
charged zein nanoparticles (ZNPs) in hydroponically grown sugarcane plants. Fluorescent ZNPs
23
(spherical and measuring an average diameter 135±3 nm) were synthesized by emulsion-
24
diffusion method from FITC-tagged zein. Fluorescent measurement following digestion of plant
25
tissue indicated that sugarcane roots had a significant adhesion of ZNPs, 342.5±24.2 µg
26
NPs/mg of dry matter, while sugarcane leaves contained a very limited amount, 12.9±1.2 µg
27
NPs/mg dry matter for high dose after 12 hrs. Confocal microscopy studies confirmed
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
1
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry
Page 2 of 30
28
presence of fluorescent ZNPs in the epidermis and endodermis of the root system. Given their
29
ability to adhere to roots for extended periods of time, ZNPs are proposed as effective delivery
30
systems for agrochemicals to sugarcane plants, but more studies are needed to identify effect of
31
nanoparticle exposure to health of the plant.
32 33
34
Until recently, nanomaterials were developed nearly exclusively for biomedical,
35
electronics, and energy fields applications.1 As a result of significant achievements in
36
these fields, research in the agricultural sector has begun to eagerly approach
37
nanoparticles as pesticide vectors, while investigating their impact on the environment.2,3
38
Current methods for administering pesticides such as manual backpack type spraying,
39
self-propelled row-crop spraying, aerosol spraying etc. have several limitations most
40
critically including the direct human and environment exposure, and uneven distribution
41
of pesticides. Despite toxicity concerns, pesticides might undergo microbial degradation,
42
degradation by sun exposure, and hydrolysis, such that a very low percentage of the
43
sprayed chemical is delivered to the plant and insect.4,5 It has been reported that more
44
than 90% of the conventional agrochemicals are lost and never reach the desired target
45
due to application or environmental conditions. To maintain the agrochemical
46
concentration over the minimum effective concentration, periodical applications are
47
required. The process increases the cost, and excess of agrochemicals end up in the soil
48
and water with negative environmental impacts.6,7
INTRODUCTION
49
Nanomaterials offer a safer and more efficient method for pesticide delivery.8
50
Pesticide concentration can be decreased by delivering it with engineered bio-adhesive
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
2
Page 3 of 30
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry
51
nanodelivery systems and by decreasing degradation of the nano-entrapped pesticide
52
during application.9,10,11 Some relevant examples of nanoparticles studied for
53
agrochemical delivery are polymeric nanoparticles synthesized out of sodium alginate,10
54
Eudragit S100,11 chitosan,12 poly(lactic acid),13 as well as solid lipid nanoparticles.14
55
These nanoparticles showed promising results for agrochemical delivery relative to
56
traditional formulations, but limited data about polymeric nanoparticle interaction with
57
plants is available in the literature.
58
Current research on nanoparticle-plant interaction has focused mainly on metallic
59
nanoparticles such as TiO2, ZnO2, fullerenes, quantum dots, gold, silver, copper and iron
60
oxide, showing evidence of nanomaterial uptake by plants through seeds, roots and
61
leaves.15,16,17,18,19 Several factors affect uptake and translocation of metallic nanomaterials
62
such as particle’s size, shape, dissolution rate, agglomeration state, surface chemistry,20
63
but equally important, plant species has an enormous impact on whether or not the
64
nanoparticle will translocate from the root system into the stems and leaves.21
65
It has been established that metallic nanoparticles enter a plant through the roots.22 The
66
soil is a place in which nanoparticles are likely to accumulate as a result of run-off,
67
making the roots a potential primary organ of exposure, while some nanoparticles can be
68
applied directly to the leaves by broadcasting.23 Through the roots, plants interact strongly
69
with the environment, absorbing mainly water and nutrients, but also contaminants and
70
other materials. Absorption of nanoparticles through the root is controlled based mainly
71
on nanoparticle size, given the pore diameter of the root of 5 to 20 nm.1 The macro-
72
structure of the root is responsible for the extent of nanoparticle absorption: plants with
73
more lateral roots provide additional surface area for more absorption.24 Nanomaterials
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
3
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry
Page 4 of 30
74
properties may also modulate interaction with the roots because of the possibility of
75
mechanical adhesion, electrostatic adsorption, and hydrophobic affinity, which has been
76
responsible for accumulation on the surface and in the epidermis of the root.25 Part of the
77
reason nanoparticles are thought to adhere to the root surface is because of the release of
78
exudates and mucilage, which is made up of amino acids and organic acids providing an
79
overall negative surface charge.26, 27
80
A subject of keen interest is nanoparticle translocation, which refers to the particle
81
moving from the roots into the shoots. After the nanoparticles diffuse through the cell
82
wall pores of the roots, there are two paths they can follow to move from the epidermis to
83
the endodermis: the apoplastic and symplastic route, similar to ways in which water and
84
nutrients are moved through the plant.28 To the authors’ knowledge, there is little-to-no
85
literature available on the uptake and translocation of polymeric nanoparticles (NPs) in
86
plants. The aim of this research was to study root nanoparticle uptake and translocation in
87
sugarcane plants exposed to NPs hydroponically.
88
The selected polymer for nanoparticle synthesis was zein, a protein derived from
89
Zea mays L (corn). Zein is water insoluble, amphiphilic, renewable, and biodegradable29
90
and hence preferred for agrochemical delivery. Zein nanoparticles (ZNPs) have shown
91
potential applications as carrier vehicle for delivery of drugs,8,30 gene delivery,31 as well
92
as surface coatings,32 etc. Various geometries of ZNPs have been explored such as
93
spheres, hexagonal, sponge, lamellar phases, and nano-tubes etc. by tailoring the
94
microphase behavior of zein based on ethanol: water ratio.33 This is possible since zein
95
contains over 50% hydrophobic regions, and has the ability to form nanoparticles of
96
specific surface chemistry due to its unique amino acid distribution.34 Various methods of
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
4
Page 5 of 30
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry
97
ZNPs synthesis, their stability, and surface properties have already been well established.
98
The main objective of this study was to synthesize ZNPs via emulsion-diffusion method
99
using didodecyldimethylammonium bromide (ddMab) as a positively charged stabilizing
100
surfactant and particles were fluorescently tagged to allow for qualitative and quantitative
101
tracking in the plant. Fluorescence microscopy, fluorescence measurement, and
102
transmission microscopy were employed to quantitatively and qualitatively assess
103
nanoparticle association with sugarcane roots and their translocation to the leaves of the
104
plant. The understanding of the ZNPs uptake, translocation, and distribution in plants
105
would help in the development of zein nanoparticles as a potent carrier vehicle for
106
delivery of agrochemicals with a broader impact both in food and agricultural
107
applications. This work will advance the fields of controlled release materials, plant
108
pathology, materials science/engineering, and agricultural chemistry.
109 110
111
Materials. Zein powder, fluorescein isothiocyanate (FITC), dichloromethane (DCM), and
112
didodecyldimethylammonium bromide (ddMab) were purchased from Sigma-Aldrich
113
(Sigma
114
dimethylformamide (DMF), triethylamine and acetone was purchased from Fisher
115
Chemical (Fisher Scientific International, Fairlawn, NJ). Ultrapure (type 1, 18.2 MΩ)
116
water was obtained using a NANOpure Diamond™ machine (Barnstead International, IA,
117
USA). Hoagland medium was purchased from plant media bioWORLD (bioWORLD,
118
Ohio, USA). Sugarcane plants (HoCP09-804 variety) were provided by Louisiana State
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Chemical
Co.
Ltd.,
St.
Louis,
MO).
Sodium
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
hydroxide
(NaOH),
5
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry
Page 6 of 30
119
University’s Agricultural Center and collected from Sugar Research Station. All other
120
chemicals used were of laboratory grade.
121
Fluorescent tagging of zein via FITC. In order to track the ZNPs through the
122
roots and leaves, prior to preparation of ZNPs, zein was conjugated with a fluorophore
123
(FITC). Accurately weighed zein powder (3 g) was dissolved in 100 ml DMF, in a 250 ml
124
round bottom flask completely covered with aluminum foil to avoid light exposure. Next,
125
0.1 mL of triethylamine and 80 mg of FITC were slowly added under gentle stirring at
126
room temperature. Stirring was stopped after 24 hours and the sample was concentrated
127
(approximately 25 ml) under high vacuum conditions. Subsequently, the concentrated
128
suspension was washed and precipitated with DCM (50 ml) and the cycle was performed
129
for six times to ensure free dye removal. Finally, the precipitate was dried in an oven
130
(40°C) under high vacuum for 24 hours and kept at 4oC in an amber container until
131
further use. The absence of free FITC residue was further confirmed by HPLC analysis.
132
ZNPs preparation. Emulsion-diffusion method was used to prepare fluorescent
133
ZNPs. The organic phase was prepared by dissolving equal amounts of zein powder (200
134
mg) and zein with covalently tagged FITC (zein-FITC, 200 mg) in 10 ml of an acetone:
135
water solution (8:2, v/v) and kept under rigorous stirring in a closed container covered
136
with aluminum foil until complete dissolution. The aqueous phase was prepared by
137
mixing ddMab (57.8 mg) in 100 ml of water under stirring settings. Finally, the emulsion
138
was prepared by adding the organic phase drop wise into the aqueous phase under
139
rigorous stirring, and passing the resulting emulsion through a microfluidizer (M-110P,
140
Microfluidics, MA, USA) at a pressure of 30,000 psi, thrice. Next, the acetone was
141
evaporated with a rotavapor Buchi R-300 (Buchi Analytical Inc., DE, USA) under
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
6
Page 7 of 30
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry
142
vacuum and the suspension was brought with additional water to a final volume of 110
143
ml. For each experiment a freshly prepared fluorescent ZNPs suspension was used.
144
Transmission electron microscopy. Transmission electron microscopy (TEM)
145
was performed on a JEOL 1400, (Jeol USA Inc, Peabody, MA). A droplet of freshly
146
prepared ZNPs suspension was placed over a carbon grid and allowed to dry. The dried
147
patch was then stained with 2% uranyl acetate solution as a contrast agent and the excess
148
droplet was removed with a filter paper. The dried film was then loaded into a TEM
149
sample holder for visualization.
150
Dynamic light scattering. Dynamic light scattering (DLS) was used to determine
151
the mean particle size, zeta potential and polydispersity index (PDI) of the ZNPs using a
152
ZetasizerNano (Malvern Instruments, Southborough, MA) at a pH of 6. The analysis was
153
performed at 25 ºC on a freshly prepared ZNPs sample, and the values of size and
154
polydispersity index were determined using mono-modal distribution.
155
Exposure of sugarcane plants to ZNPs in a hydroponic system. To study the
156
uptake and translocation of ZNPs in sugarcane plants of HoCP09-804 variety, the 2
157
weeks old-plants were transferred in a hydroponic culture systems (1.6g/L) spiked with
158
varying doses of freshly prepared fluorescent ZNPs. In this study, the plants were exposed
159
to two doses containing 0.88 mg/mL low dose (LD), and 1.75mg/mL high dose (HD) of
160
fluorescent ZNPs. The concentrations selected were correlated to relevant pesticide
161
concentrations when entrapped in zein nanoparticles. Control plants were not exposed to
162
ZNPs and contained only water and Hoagland hydroponic solution (1:1 ratio). All
163
experiments were conducted in triplicates in beakers completely covered with aluminum
164
foils to prevent evaporation and the photobleaching of the fluorescently labeled NPs. All
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
7
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry
Page 8 of 30
165
plants were grown in a controlled environment chamber (Intellus Environmental
166
Controller, Percival: Perry, IA) at 27°C under cool, white fluorescent light with 16/8 h
167
light/dark cycle. Samples of roots and leaves were collected at 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, and 12 hours
168
using separate batches of sugarcane plants for roots and leaves. The collected samples
169
were freeze dried using a lyophilizer FreeZone 2.5 Plus (Labconco Corp., Kansas City,
170
MO) for further study.
171
Confocal laser-scanning microscopy. Confocal laser scanning microscopy
172
(CLSM) performed on Leica TCS SP2 microscope (Leica Inc, Buffalo Grove, IL) was
173
used to visualize the fluorescent ZNPs translocation in sugarcane root samples immersed
174
into Hoagland solution spiked with two different doses of ZNPs. The accumulation of
175
ZNPs in the sugarcane root system was detected based on the fluorescence imparted by
176
FITC. CLSM images were obtained at Excitation/Emission: 480-495nm and 550/560nm.
177
Images were taken under Leica 20x (NA 0·75) oil immersion objective lens. Argon laser
178
were used for NR and GFP excitation. Pictures have brightness and contrast
179
enhancements. Thin sections of the root samples were placed on a glass slide covered
180
with a cover slip and few drops of distilled water was added to keep it hydrated. For
181
imaging the internal root structure, a standard protocol was followed which involved four
182
basic steps: tissue fixation, dehydration, rehydration and successive embedment of the
183
root.35 Root samples from control, low dose and high dose were washed with PBS and
184
subjected to 2.3 M sucrose gradient infiltration overnight at 4°C. The root samples where
185
then placed on the cryostat and sectioned with optimum cutting temperature (OCT). The
186
thinner cut sections were then placed on the glass slide with the sections facing upright.
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
8
Page 9 of 30
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry
187
For each study three root tips were examined from one treatment group before
188
representative images were selected.
189
Uptake, biotransformation, and bioaccumulation of fluorescent ZNPs.
190
Pulverized freeze dried root (3mg) and leaves (2mg) samples, originating from the low
191
dose, high dose and control plant batches (5 samples/batch), were weighed in amber
192
Eppendorf tubes. Next, 1 ml of 1N NaOH was added to each tube and placed into an
193
agitated water bath at 70° C for 30 minutes. Then, the samples were centrifuged at
194
50,000xg for 15 minutes at 16° C. After digestion, the obtained clear supernatant’s
195
fluorescence was determined in triplicate on 100 µl sample aliquots in a dark 96-well
196
plate using a Cell Imaging Multi-Mode reader Cytation 3 (BioTek Instruments, Inc.,
197
Winooski, VT) equipped with Gen5 data analysis software. Three samples of 1N NaOH
198
(100 µl) were used as blank. The nanoparticle concentration in each sample was
199
calculated using a standard curve developed by measuring the fluorescence (λexc = 495
200
nm; λem = 525 nm) of FITC-labeled ZNPs at known concentrations digested with 1N
201
NaOH.
202
Statistical analysis. One way analysis of means using all pairs Tukey Kramer
203
HSD were performed using JMP Pro 13 software (SAS Institute, Cary NC) to
204
demonstrate significant difference (p