Nanotechnology for fungal pathogen control in crops: innovations, public health impacts, and disease prevention

Fungal pathogens continue to devastate global agriculture, causing significant crop losses, compromising food security, and posing emerging threats to public health. This paper critically examines the revolutionary role of nanotechnology-driven innovations in combating fungal diseases in crops, offering an integrative framework that bridges plant health, environmental sustainability, and human well-being. We synthesize recent advancements in agricultural nanomaterials, including silver, zinc oxide, and copper oxide nanoparticles, as well as green-synthesized nanoformulations. We examine their antifungal mechanisms, including membrane disruption, induction of oxidative stress, targeted delivery, and inhibition of spore germination. The review highlights how nanosensors can facilitate early detection of pathogens, while nano-enabled packaging and innovative delivery systems prevent post-harvest contamination and extend shelf life. Crucially, we underscore the public health benefits of reduced chemical pesticide use, lowered mycotoxin exposure, and the potential for mitigating antimicrobial resistance. The paper advances the discourse on environmentally responsible, high-precision disease control strategies in agriculture by linking nanotechnology to broader sustainability goals. Furthermore, we identify key challenges, including regulatory ambiguity, ecotoxicological concerns, and barriers to equitable adoption, especially among smallholder farmers in the Global South. This paper contributes a forward-looking agenda for integrating nanotechnology into holistic pest management systems through inclusive policies, interdisciplinary research, and stakeholder-driven implementation pathways. Overall, this review positions nanotechnology as a transformative tool in reengineering crop protection paradigms that align innovation with sustainability, resilience, and public health imperatives in the face of escalating global challenges.

1 Introduction

The advent of nanotechnology represents a revolutionary shift in agricultural practices, particularly in managing fungal pathogens that threaten crop yield and quality. Nanotechnology may be defined as manipulating matter on an atomic, molecular, and supramolecular scale to offer promising innovations for sustainable agriculture (Ray et al., 2023). The applications of nanotechnology in agriculture encompass enhanced disease management, precision farming, and advanced delivery systems for agrochemicals, which are essential components for improving crop resilience to pathogens (Kumar et al., 2023; Shahid et al., 2023). As the global agricultural landscape increasingly confronts challenges posed by climate change and pest resistance, the role of nanotechnology in fostering sustainable farming practices gains significance (Das et al., 2021; Vijayreddy et al., 2023).

Emerging threats from plant fungal pathogens have escalated concerns regarding food security, given their capacity to decimate crops and reduce overall agricultural productivity (Bebber and Gurr, 2015; Kang et al., 2021). The estimated annual losses due to fungal diseases can reach approximately 20% of agricultural yield, impacting global food supply chains and increasing food prices (Godfray et al., 2016; Almeida et al., 2019; Ogwu et al., 2024). Additionally, the rising incidence of pathogen resistance to conventional fungicides exacerbates the challenges faced by farmers, necessitating innovative solutions that nanotechnology can provide (Azevedo et al., 2015; Ogwu and Izah, 2023). These solutions could redefine conventional disease management approaches by integrating bioactive nanomaterials that can disrupt fungal growth mechanisms (Ogwu and Osawaru, 2022; Shahid et al., 2023).

Fungal diseases significantly hinder agriculture, prompting economists, agronomists, and public health officials to assess their broader implications beyond crop losses (Suryani et al., 2023). The global impact of plant fungal pathogens, as evidenced by the proliferation of diseases such as rust, blight, and mildew, underlines the urgency for effective management strategies (Bebber and Gurr, 2015). Pathogens like Aspergillus fumigatus threaten crops and have also been implicated in the emergence of antifungal resistance within human pathogens, creating a nexus between agricultural practices and public health (Kang et al., 2021). The occurrence of pathogenic strains resistant to azole fungicides poses significant challenges for both crop management and clinical treatment (Azevedo et al., 2015; Shen et al., 2022). The conventional reliance on synthetic fungicides has been insufficient, primarily due to fungicide resistance and the detrimental impact of chemical residues on soil health and microbial diversity (Dutta et al., 2023; Hamid and Saleem, 2022). Researchers highlight that nitrogen and phosphorus fertilization practices have unintentionally favored pathogenic fungi, illustrating the complex interactions within agricultural ecosystems that can lead to increased disease severity (Lekberg et al., 2021). Therefore, advancements in nanotechnology that target these specific pathways promise more effective and sustainable disease control methods, which can be integrated into current agricultural frameworks (Vijayreddy et al., 2023; Ogwu et al., 2024; 2025).

The interrelationship between plant health, crop diseases, and public health is multifaceted. Effective management of crop diseases is vital for food security and has broader implications for environmental and human health (Bratovčić et al., 2023). The circulatory impact of agricultural practices on public health is evident in the context of zoonotic diseases and the frequent human exposure to harmful pesticides, commonly used in traditional farming methods. The transition towards nanotechnology applications in agriculture could mitigate these risks by offering targeted delivery systems that minimize chemical usage while maximizing pest and pathogen control (Sharma et al., 2024). The environmental repercussions of conventional agriculture also heighten public health concerns. Pesticide residues frequently contaminate soil and water, posing significant threats to both terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems (Dutta et al., 2023; Hamid and Saleem, 2022). Agriculture can utilize nanotechnology to enhance the efficacy of biocontrol agents and reduce chemical inputs by leveraging the unique properties of nanomaterials, such as their high surface-area-to-volume ratio (Shahid et al., 2023). This change helps maintain ecosystem health, which is essential for long-term agricultural output and, in turn, for public health outcomes, as well as for disease control. Therefore, embracing nanotechnology can reduce reliance on harmful synthetic chemicals, aligning agricultural practices with the Sustainable Development Goals (Ogwu et al. 2024). Nanotechnology has the potential to enhance food safety by reducing post-harvest losses and increasing disease resistance, leading to higher-quality produce and improved public health outcomes (Bratovčić et al., 2023).

This review offers a critical and integrative examination of the emerging role of nanotechnology in controlling fungal pathogens that affect crop systems, with a particular focus on its implications for sustainable agriculture, food safety, and public health. Unlike existing reviews that predominantly address the synthesis and application of nanomaterials in crop protection (Chhipa, 2017; Worrall et al., 2018), our work offers a transdisciplinary perspective that situates nanotechnological innovations within a broader context of global health and environmental sustainability. It uniquely emphasizes the dual relevance of fungal disease management and public health, especially in low- and middle-income countries where the burden of foodborne mycotoxins and antimicrobial resistance remains high. The review synthesizes cutting-edge developments in the design and deployment of nanomaterials, including metallic nanoparticles, nanoemulsions, and stimuli-responsive delivery systems for effective and targeted fungal control. It elucidates their underlying antifungal mechanisms, such as cell membrane disruption, oxidative stress induction, and enzymatic inhibition, while also evaluating their capacity to overcome conventional resistance pathways. Furthermore, we explore nanotechnology-enabled strategies for early pathogen detection, post-harvest disease mitigation, and intelligent food packaging that collectively enhance food quality and shelf life. Crucially, the review addresses key issues related to equity, ecology, and regulations that are crucial to the responsible application of nanotechnologies. This review provides a thorough synthesis that connects nanoscience, plant pathology, and public health, advancing a novel framework for the inclusive and sustainable integration of nanotechnology into international crop protection efforts.

2 Nanotechnology approaches for managing fungal pathogens

The burgeoning field of nanotechnology has been increasingly recognized for its role in managing fungal pathogens, particularly through the use of various nanomaterials (Figure 1). Figure 1 illustrates the dual role of nanoparticles in agriculture as both protectants and carriers. As protectants, nanoparticles such as silver, copper, gold, titanium dioxide, and chitosan directly inhibit plant pathogens, including bacteria, viruses, fungi, and insect pests. As carriers, various nanomaterials, including chitosan, silica, solid lipid nanoparticles, and layered double hydroxides, enhance the delivery and efficacy of active agents such as insecticides, fungicides, herbicides, and RNA-interference molecules (Worrall et al., 2018). Nanodelivery systems offer multiple agronomic benefits, including increased shelf life, targeted delivery, enhanced solubility, and reduced toxicity and environmental leaching, thereby contributing to sustainable and precise pest management strategies in modern agriculture (Figure 1; Worrall et al., 2018).

Figure 1

Figure 1. Nanoparticles as smart tools for crop pest protection and agrochemical delivery. Source: Worrall et al. (2018), reproduced under CC BY 4.0 license.

These materials differ in composition, structure, and functional mechanisms, offering a wide range of benefits from enhanced efficacy to environmental sustainability. Table 1 categorizes key types of antifungal nanomaterials, highlighting their representative examples, modes of action, application methods, advantages, and corresponding references. This classification provides a foundational understanding of how nanotechnology can be strategically leveraged to combat fungal pathogens in crops while reducing chemical inputs, improving delivery precision, and supporting sustainable disease management practices. Among these materials, nanoparticles such as silver, zinc oxide, and copper oxide have been shown to exhibit antifungal properties.

Table 1

Table 1. Nanotechnology approaches for managing fungal pathogens in agriculture.

Silver nanoparticles (AgNPs) are among the most extensively studied nanomaterials due to their broad-spectrum biological activities and unique physicochemical characteristics (Figure 2). Chemically, AgNPs exhibit potent antifungal, antiviral, antibacterial, anticancer, and anti-inflammatory activities, making them valuable in medicine, agriculture, and environmental management. Physically, nanoscale size, surface charge, shape variability, optical behavior, and superior conductivity contribute to their versatility and effectiveness (Figure 2). These traits make AgNPs promising candidates for next-generation solutions across disciplines, including plant pathology, healthcare, and nanotechnology-enabled diagnostics. AgNPs are particularly noted for their broad-spectrum antimicrobial activities, including efficacy against diverse fungal strains such as Candida and Aspergillus species (Santos et al., 2021; Wahab et al., 2023). Research reveals that these nanoparticles can disrupt the cell membranes of fungi, which is pivotal in inhibiting growth and inducing cell death via apoptosis (Pachaiappan et al., 2021; Mohsen et al., 2022). This phenomenon is primarily attributed to their ability to release silver ions, which interact with cellular components, leading to oxidative stress and functional impairment of pathogenic cells (Mohammed et al., 2018; Ikhajiagbe et al., 2020; Wahab et al., 2023).

Figure 2

Figure 2. Multifunctional properties of silver nanoparticles: chemical and physical perspectives. Source: Duman et al. (2024), reproduced under CC BY 4.0 license.

Zinc oxide nanoparticles (ZnO NPs), another promising class of nanomaterials, have been extensively researched for their antifungal capabilities. Their efficacy can be attributed to their unique physical and chemical properties, which allow them to generate reactive oxygen species (ROS) that damage fungal cells (Sun et al., 2018; Cruz-Luna et al., 2021). ZnO NPs have been shown to interfere with enzyme activities associated with cellular metabolism, resulting in inhibited growth and spore formation of pathogenic fungi (Sun et al., 2018; Pachaiappan et al., 2021). The contact of fungal cells with these nanoparticles typically leads to membrane damage, thus crippling their functional integrity and viability (Cruz-Luna et al.,2021). Moreover, novel synthesis techniques such as those involving plant extracts have been explored, which enhance the biocompatibility of ZnO NPs and reduce environmental impact, further appealing to eco-aware agricultural practices (Adebayo et al., 2021; Cruz-Luna et al., 2023). For instance, synthesized through hydrothermal methods involving zinc ions (Zn⁺) and hydroxide (OH⁻), followed by encapsulation with silica (TEOS) and a surfactant (CTAB), the ZnO@SiO₂ nanostructures are designed to inhibit microbial contamination in stored maize (Zhou et al., 2023). Upon mixing with maize seeds, these nanoparticles protect against fungal and bacterial pathogens, improving seed viability and extending storage life (Figure 3; Zhou et al., 2023).

Figure 3

Figure 3. Application of ZnO@SiO₂ nanocomposites in maize protection and seed storage. Source: Zhou et al. (2023), reproduced under CC BY 4.0 license.

Equally significant are copper oxide nanoparticles (CuO NPs), which have demonstrated efficient antifungal effects, particularly against resistant strains (Zhao et al., 2020; Wahab et al., 2023). Their action revolves around generating oxidative stress within the target cells, which ultimately induces apoptosis (Zhao et al., 2020; Wahab et al., 2023). Numerous studies have corroborated the use of CuO NPs in agricultural settings, where they provide an alternative to synthetic fungicides, minimizing the environmental footprint and enhancing sustainable practices in fungal management (Sun et al., 2018; Pachaiappan et al., 2021). The potential utilization of these metallic nanoparticles in agroecosystems signifies a considerable shift toward more sustainable pest management strategies. Figure 4 presents the green synthesis of copper oxide nanoparticles (CuONPs) using fungal biomass and extracts, followed by their application in inhibiting fungal pathogens, specifically Candida species (Garcia-Marin et al., 2022). The process begins with the extraction of bioactive compounds from fungal cultures, which are then used to synthesize CuONPs, as indicated by the color change in solution. The resulting nanoparticles exhibit strong antifungal effects, as demonstrated by the inhibition zones on agar plates and the ultrastructural damage to Candida cells observed under electron microscopy (Garcia-Marin et al., 2022; Figure 4). This eco-friendly nanobiotechnology approach holds promise for sustainable antifungal strategies in agriculture and clinical settings, offering a safer alternative to conventional chemical fungicides.

Figure 4

Figure 4. Fungal biosynthesis of copper nanoparticles (CuONPs) and their antifungal activity against Candida spp. Source: Garcia-Marin et al. (2022), reproduced under CC BY 4.0 license.

Nanocarriers and controlled release systems have also emerged as innovative approaches to enhancing the delivery of antifungal agents. Some examples of nanocarriers include liposomes, solid lipid nanoparticles, gold and iron oxide nanoparticles, polymeric micelles, and carbon nanotubes (Figure 5). Nanocarriers are engineered nanoscale materials designed for the targeted delivery of active compounds, including agrochemicals, pharmaceuticals, and nutrients. Their high surface-area-to-volume ratio, tunable physicochemical properties, and ability to carry functional payloads make them highly versatile (Hani et al., 2024). By encapsulating antifungal agents within nanostructured carriers, the stability and bioavailability of these compounds can be enhanced, potentially improving their therapeutic efficacy and reducing systemic toxicity. While the concept of targeted delivery to fungal cells is promising, current scientific evidence supporting precise, pathogen-specific targeting remains limited and largely exploratory (Adebayo et al., 2021; Cruz-Luna et al., 2023). However, polymer-based nanocarriers have shown potential for controlled and sustained release of antifungal agents, helping to maintain localized drug concentrations over extended periods (Madkour, 2017; Alghuthaymi et al., 2015). This sustained release may reduce dosing frequency and side effects associated with conventional treatments, thereby improving therapeutic outcomes and patient compliance.

Figure 5

Figure 5. Some types and examples of nanocarriers. Sources: adapted from Hani et al. (2024), reproduced under CC BY 4.0 license.

Nanostructured materials, including nanotubes and nanowires, provide additional avenues for inhibiting fungal pathogens. Figure 6 presents the multi-dimensional framework for classifying nanostructured materials based on five key criteria according to Harish et al. (2022):

● Composition: Nanoparticles may be organic, inorganic, carbonaceous (e.g., fullerenes), or composites combining multiple materials.

● Dimensionality: Classification by shape and size includes zero-dimensional (0D, spherical), one-dimensional (1D, rod-like), two-dimensional (2D, sheet-like), and three-dimensional (3D, complex shapes).

● Phases: Nanoparticles can exhibit a single-phase structure or a multiphase architecture with core-shell or layered configurations.

● Dispersion State: Nanoparticles are categorized as dispersed or aggregated, with further distinction between isomeric and inhomogeneous forms in each case.

● Origin: Their source can be natural (e.g., biological processes), incidental (e.g., volcanic emissions), or engineered (e.g., laboratory synthesis).

Figure 6

Figure 6. Comprehensive classification of nanoparticles. Source: Harish et al. (2022), reproduced under CC BY 4.0 license.

The structures of these materials can interact with fungal cell surfaces, leading to the obstruction of essential metabolic pathways or even physical disruption through structural nanomechanical interactions (Dhillon et al., 2011; Rai et al., 2021). The unique aspects of these materials facilitate enhanced interaction at the cellular level, thereby improving their antifungal efficacy compared to traditional bulk materials (Cruz-Luna et al., 2023). Furthermore, the versatile nature of nanostructured materials enables their modification and functionalization with various antifungal agents, thereby expanding their application scope in agricultural biotechnology (Adebayo et al., 2021).

The mechanisms of action of these nanoscale materials also reveal intricate pathways through which fungal pathogens can be managed. The disruption of cell membranes by nanoparticles is a fundamental action that can be explained through the formation of reactive oxygen species and the interaction between nanoparticles and various cellular targets, including proteins and nucleic acids (Pachaiappan et al., 2021; Adebayo et al., 2021). Studies have illustrated how AgNPs induce morphological changes in fungal cells, contributing to their lethal effects and showcasing their potential as viable alternatives to synthetic fungicides in agriculture (Panchangam and Upputuri, 2019; Rai et al., 2021). The advantages of nanotechnology over traditional fungal control methods extend beyond enhanced efficacy. The use of nanoparticles can significantly mitigate the environmental and health risks typically associated with conventional fungicides. Research indicates that lower amounts are necessary to achieve the desired antifungal effects compared to traditional chemical agents, which can decrease chemical runoff and residual toxicity in ecosystems, thereby reinforcing ecological health (Wahab et al., 2023; Mohsen et al., 2022).

Additionally, their sustained-release properties can minimize the frequency of application and enhance treatment efficiency, even though precise, pathogen-specific targeting remains an aspirational goal in agricultural nanotechnology. Current formulations aim to prolong antifungal activity and improve stability rather than achieve selective action against individual pathogens (Cruz-Luna et al., 2021; Alghuthaymi et al., 2015). Moreover, as nanotechnology integrates into agricultural practices, compliance with increasingly stringent environmental regulations is facilitated, making the approach beneficial for crop protection and aligned with global sustainability goals (Sun et al., 2018; Adebayo et al., 2021). The application of nanotechnology in managing fungal pathogens is multifaceted, involving various types of nanoparticles, nanocarriers, and nanostructured materials that enhance efficacy and address the limitations of traditional methods. The ongoing research into these applications suggests a promising transformation in how we approach fungal infections in agriculture and potentially in clinical settings, heralding a future where nanotechnology could significantly enhance our ability to combat microbial threats.

3 Public health impacts of nanotechnology in agriculture

Integrating nanotechnology into agriculture is increasingly recognized as a transformative approach to address various public health challenges, notably through its role in reducing reliance on harmful pesticides, enhancing food safety, mitigating antibiotic resistance, and navigating associated environmental risks. The versatility of nanomaterials enables precise and controlled applications that minimize unintended human and ecological harm while enhancing disease control efficacy. However, alongside these benefits, potential risks associated with nanoparticle persistence, bioaccumulation, and cross-sectoral interactions must be carefully assessed. Table 2 outlines the key public health domains influenced by nanotechnology in agriculture, detailing the roles and impacts of nano-enabled innovations, associated risks, and recommended strategies for mitigating these risks. This framework supports a balanced, evidence-based understanding of how nanotechnology can be harnessed to promote safer, more resilient, and health-conscious food systems.

Table 2

Table 2. Public health impacts of nanotechnology in agriculture.

3.1 Reducing the use of harmful pesticides

Nanotechnology offers innovative solutions that can significantly reduce dependency on traditional chemical pesticides, which are often associated with adverse environmental and health effects. This transition arises from the ability of nanomaterials to enhance the efficacy of pesticides by allowing for targeted delivery and controlled release, overcoming limitations of conventional formulations that often lead to over-application and soil contamination (Kim et al., 2017). For instance, nanopesticides are designed to maximize the effective concentration of active ingredients while minimizing dispersal in the surrounding ecosystem, reducing the chemical load in agricultural practices (Parveen et al., 2023; Izah and Ogwu, 2023). Human health benefits arise from decreased pesticide exposure, which is correlated with fewer pesticide-related illnesses among both agricultural workers and consumers. Reducing chemical residues in crops directly contributes to improved food safety standards, as consumers are more likely to purchase and consume products not laden with toxic residues. Studies indicate that lower chemical usage can diminish the risk of chronic health issues associated with pesticide exposure, including endocrine disruption and neurotoxicity (Kim et al., 2017). Thus, the technological shift towards nanopesticides is pivotal for environmental sustainability and advancing public health concerns related to contaminated food supplies.

3.2 Food safety and nanotechnology

The promise of nanotechnology extends into food safety, particularly through its applications in preventing fungal contamination in crops. Mycotoxins, produced by certain fungi, pose significant health risks as they can enter the food supply chain, leading to various health issues, including carcinogenic effects (Zhang et al., 2020; Nurtjahja et al., 2022). Nanotechnology offers mechanisms to mitigate this issue, such as the development of nanosensors that detect and monitor fungal pathogens in real-time, enabling timely intervention (Rahim et al., 2021). In addition to detection, nanomaterials can offer antifungal properties that inhibit the growth of pathogenic fungi, thereby safeguarding food quality (Parveen et al., 2023; Zhang et al., 2020). These advancements have shown promise in field applications and post-harvest treatment, enhancing the shelf life of agricultural produce by targeting mycotoxin-producing strains, such as Aspergillus flavus (Nurtjahja et al., 2022). The subsequent reduction in mycotoxin levels is correlated with improved public health outcomes. It mitigates foodborne illnesses and reduces associated healthcare costs, underscoring the importance of integrating nanotechnology into agricultural practices for enhanced food safety.

3.3 Mitigating antibiotic resistance in agriculture

Antibiotic resistance has escalated into a global public health crisis, extensively linked to agricultural practices that employ antibiotics for disease prevention and growth promotion (Economou and Gousia, 2015; Checcucci et al., 2020). The transference of antibiotic-resistant bacteria and genes through soil, water, and food systems poses severe health risks to human populations, necessitating alternative strategies to mitigate this threat (Ogwu and Izah, 2025). Current research highlights the potential of nanotechnology as a non-antibiotic solution aimed at controlling pathogens without exacerbating antibiotic resistance (Chang et al., 2014). Nanomaterials exhibit antimicrobial properties that can effectively reduce plant pathogenic loads, thus potentially replacing antibiotic treatments (Kischkel et al., 2020). Nanotechnology could minimize the selection pressures that lead to the emergence of resistant strains in both agricultural and human contexts. For instance, studies demonstrate that applying such nanomaterials can suppress bacterial growth in crops, thereby reducing the need for chemical inputs that contribute to the resistance problem (Rahim et al., 2021). Collaborative efforts between agricultural research and public health can ensure that advancements in nanotechnology are effectively harnessed to combat antibiotic resistance and promote a safer food system for consumers.

Unlike conventional fungicides, which often act through single, specific biochemical pathways, making them prone to resistance development, nanomaterials exert their antifungal effects through multiple simultaneous mechanisms (Rai et al., 2009; Lemire et al., 2013). These include physical interactions, such as membrane disruption, the generation of reactive oxygen species, and interference with intracellular components, including DNA and enzymes (Khan and Rizvi, 2014; Lemire et al., 2013). This mode of action makes it more difficult for fungal pathogens to adapt through mutation or selection of resistant strains. Additionally, the nanoscale size of these materials enables closer and more prolonged interaction with target cells, enhancing their fungicidal potency while reducing the likelihood of metabolic or efflux-based resistance. However, ongoing monitoring is essential, as overuse or improper application of nanomaterials could eventually select for tolerance mechanisms, especially under field conditions.

3.4 Environmental and human health risks of nanomaterials

As with any emerging technology, the deployment of nanotechnology in agriculture raises concerns regarding environmental and human health risks. The potential for exposure to nanomaterials through food, water, and soil necessitates rigorous assessment protocols to understand their biological interactions and possible toxicological effects (Yang et al., 2019; Kristanti et al., 2021; Izah and Ogwu, 2025). Current literature suggests that nanomaterials can enhance agricultural productivity and sustainability; however, their release into ecosystems poses unintended risks, encompassing both ecological and health dimensions (Ikhajiagbe et al., 2020; Zahid et al., 2022). Establishing safety protocols and regulatory frameworks that govern the use of nanomaterials in agriculture is imperative to mitigate these risks. Continuous research is essential to evaluate the long-term impacts of nanomaterial exposure on human health and the environment, ensuring that public health is prioritized in the integration of these technologies (Kim et al., 2017; Alazaiza et al., 2021). Collaboration among scientists, regulatory agencies, and policymakers will play a critical role in establishing robust frameworks that explore benefits while addressing potential hazards associated with nanotechnology in agriculture.

The intersection of nanotechnology and agriculture presents transformative opportunities for advancing public health through innovative, science-driven practices. By reducing reliance on conventional chemical pesticides, nanotechnology minimizes harmful environmental exposures and enhances food safety and quality. Moreover, the targeted and efficient delivery systems offered by nanoscale materials hold great promise in addressing the growing global challenge of antibiotic resistance by providing alternative mechanisms for disease control. These advancements also offer tools to mitigate post-harvest losses and extend food shelf life, further contributing to nutritional security. However, deploying nanotechnologies in agricultural systems must be cautiously approached. Comprehensive risk assessments, transparent regulatory frameworks, and ongoing interdisciplinary research are crucial to mitigating unintended ecological and health consequences. Ultimately, responsible innovation in agricultural nanotechnology can be a powerful lever for achieving more resilient, equitable, and sustainable food systems while protecting human and environmental health.

4 Nanotechnology in fungal disease prevention and control

Nanotechnology is increasingly recognized as a pivotal tool in revolutionizing fungal disease management across agricultural systems, through the early detection of fungal pathogens, the prevention of cross-contamination in food systems, and its role within integrated pest management (IPM) frameworks. These innovations provide enhanced precision in monitoring and controlling fungal threats, aligning with broader public health protection, environmental sustainability, and economic resilience goals. By enabling rapid diagnostics, reducing the reliance on chemical pesticides, and enhancing crop resistance, nanotechnology establishes itself as a transformative force in developing next-generation agricultural disease prevention strategies.

4.1 Early detection of fungal pathogens using nanotechnology

Nanotechnology represents a groundbreaking advancement in agricultural practices, particularly concerning the early detection of fungal pathogens that jeopardize crop yield and food safety. The development of nanosensors allows for the rapid identification of fungal pathogens, facilitating timely intervention and management of potential outbreaks (Ray et al., 2023; Parveen et al., 2023). Traditional disease detection methods often involve lengthy processes that delay necessary treatments, whereas nanosensors provide a swift and efficient alternative, enabling farmers to act promptly to mitigate losses (Singh, 2023; Jali et al., 2024). For instance, nanoscale biosensors can detect the presence of pathogens in crops through colorimetric or electrical conductivity changes, significantly reducing the conventional constraints associated with pathogen diagnostics (Nainnwal, 2025). The impact of early detection systems extends beyond immediate crop health; they contribute significantly to preventing the spread of diseases through meticulous monitoring of environmental conditions conducive to pathogen proliferation. Continuous monitoring of soil health and climate variables is made possible by incorporating nanotechnology into precision agricultural techniques. This continuous vigilance not only aids in the early identification of threat pathogens but also fosters improved crop resilience by enabling farmers to implement targeted pest and disease management strategies (Singh, 2023; Rani et al., 2024). Consequently, integrating these technologies enhances food security and ensures that agricultural outputs remain safe for consumption. The economic implications of employing such innovative detection systems are critical. Crop losses attributed to fungal infections can range between 20% and 40%, severely impacting agricultural sustainability and economic viability (Khan et al., 2021; Ajaz et al., 2024). By promoting rapid detection methodologies facilitated by nanotechnology, agricultural stakeholders can substantially enhance crop yields while reducing their dependency on harmful chemical treatments often used for disease control (Sundararajan et al., 2023; Ajaz et al., 2024). This shift to environmentally friendly practices fosters a more sustainable agricultural landscape and addresses growing public health concerns regarding chemical residues in food products.

4.2 Prevention of cross-contamination in food systems

In addition to early detection, nanotechnology plays a significant role in preventing cross-contamination in food systems throughout storage and transportation processes. The application of nanomaterials in food safety demonstrates promising capabilities in controlling the transmission of fungal diseases, which can severely compromise food quality and safety from farm to table (Scortichini, 2022; Jagadeeshkumar, 2025). Nanoparticles can be utilized in packaging materials to enhance their antimicrobial properties, thereby reducing the risk of pathogen growth during storage (Srivastava et al., 2024; Singh et al., 2025). For example, incorporating nanosilver into packaging materials has exhibited effective and practical activities, thereby mitigating the risks of cross-contamination during food transit (Mohanty et al., 2024; Mohammad et al., 2022).

Moreover, effective management of food storage practices, augmented by nanotechnology, ensures that fungi and other pathogens are kept at bay. By optimizing packaging technologies and integrating nanoscale solutions, the shelf life of perishable products can be extended, reducing food waste and enhancing public health. Soni et al., 2024). This supports the principles of sustainability and aligns with global goals related to food security amid increasing demand for safe food sources (Hasaneen, 2023; Rani et al., 2024). The adaptability of nanotechnology in the production and distribution phases of food systems makes it a valuable asset in addressing the dual challenges of ensuring quality and maintaining safety. The strategic application of nanotechnology in monitoring food safety encompasses the development of nanosensors, which provide real-time data on the condition of food products during transportation. These sensors can track temperature, humidity, and overall quality, swiftly addressing any deviations that could lead to contamination (Rani et al., 2024; Nainnwal, 2025). By employing this advanced technological framework, it becomes increasingly feasible to implement holistic food safety systems that encompass proactive contamination prevention from the farm to the consumer’s plate.

4.3 Integrated pest management and nanotechnology

Integrating nanotechnology into IPM practices offers transformative potential for sustainable pest and disease control measures in agriculture. Traditional pest management approaches often rely heavily on chemical pesticides, which have numerous adverse effects on the environment and human health. Scortichini, 2022; Parveen et al., 2023). However, nanotechnology presents a viable alternative by allowing for the development of nanoinsecticides and nanopesticides that are not only more effective but also require smaller quantities for pest control (Mehta et al., 2024; Bratovčić et al., 2023). This precision use mitigates the risks associated with chemical runoff and the development of resistant pest populations, thus promoting both environmental sustainability and agricultural productivity (Bratovčić et al., 2023; Sundararajan et al., 2023). Moreover, combining conventional IPM methods with nanotechnology enables a comprehensive approach to pest and disease management. Techniques such as crop rotation and biological control can be enhanced by nanoscale interventions that optimize pest monitoring and control. For example, nanosensors can detect pest populations and fungal pathogens, allowing farmers to deploy targeted biological control agents precisely when and where they are needed (Ajaz et al., 2024; Soni et al., 2024). This synergy between traditional practices and innovative technologies minimizes the overall pesticide load while maintaining effective control measures. Also, as crops face increasing biotic stresses from evolving pathogens, the role of nanotechnology in bolstering plant resilience cannot be overstated. Nanoparticles can enhance nutrient uptake and improve crop vitality, making plants less susceptible to pests and diseases (Jagadeeshkumar, 2025; Parveen et al., 2023). Implementing these technologies in conjunction with traditional agricultural practices creates a multi-faceted approach that acknowledges the complexities of agricultural ecosystems and promotes biodiversity while sustainably enhancing crop yield (Ray et al., 2023; Scortichini, 2022).

Table 3 outlines key application areas where nano-enabled tools are deployed to enhance plant health and food safety. Each nanotechnological approach—from nanosensors to antimicrobial coatings and bio-based nanoformulations—serves distinct yet complementary functions. Collectively, they enable timely disease interventions, extend product shelf life, reduce post-harvest losses, and contribute to sustainable pest and disease management, including within organic farming systems. These innovations are not only improving the effectiveness and efficiency of disease control strategies but also enhancing the overall effectiveness of public health efforts. Still, they are also minimizing chemical inputs and aligning with global goals for safer, more sustainable agricultural practices.

Table 3

Table 3. Applications of nanotechnology in fungal disease prevention and control in agriculture.

5 Sustainability and innovative fungal nanotechnology in agriculture

The incorporation of nanotechnology into sustainable agricultural practices offers a transformative approach to addressing the challenges faced by modern agriculture. As the global population continues to expand and environmental constraints intensify, it becomes increasingly imperative to explore innovative methods that enhance crop productivity while minimizing environmental impact. At the forefront of this paradigm shift is the integration of nanotechnology, which has been recognized as a critical avenue for achieving sustainable agricultural practices. Phytonanotechnology leverages nanoscale interventions to optimize resource efficiency, enabling farms to produce more with fewer inputs, such as pesticides and fertilizers, while reducing their ecological footprint (Jiang et al., 2021; Tang et al., 2023). Nanotechnology promotes sustainability in agriculture primarily by enhancing the efficiency of agrochemical inputs. For instance, nanofertilizers and nanopesticides have been developed to deliver nutrients and pest control agents more precisely and effectively than conventional methods. These advanced formulations mitigate drawbacks such as nutrient leaching and pest resistance that accompany the excessive use of chemical fertilizers and pesticides. Nanoscale innovations enable the controlled release of these substances, ensuring that crops receive precisely what they need, which leads to improved agricultural outputs while reducing harmful runoff into surrounding ecosystems (Kumar et al., 2023; Mohanty et al., 2024).

Another pivotal aspect of nanotechnology in fostering sustainability is its ability to minimize the environmental footprint associated with agricultural practices. Nanomaterials can significantly reduce chemical runoff and soil contamination, as these innovations enable targeted applications where they are most needed, thereby decreasing the overall volume of chemicals applied. By enhancing the efficiency of water and nutrient usage, nanotechnology can lower the risk of soil degradation and ecological imbalances (Tripathi et al., 2023; El-Ramady et al., 2023; Iavicoli et al., 2017). This shift from broad-spectrum applications to targeted delivery represents a substantial movement towards environmentally friendly practices that can help maintain biodiversity and soil health.

Moreover, the efficiency gained through nanotechnology enhances crop resilience, particularly against fungal diseases and environmental stresses. Research indicates that nanomaterials can help bolster plant defenses, thereby increasing their resistance to biotic stresses, such as pathogens, and reducing the need for external interventions, like chemical fungicides. Such advancements contribute to agricultural sustainability by decreasing reliance on synthetic chemicals while enhancing the natural resilience of crops (Tyagi et al., 2023; Wang et al., 2024). This is particularly relevant in organic farming, as nanotechnology can equip organic growers with tools to manage pests and diseases effectively without compromising the principles of natural farming practices (Shang et al., 2019; Tang et al., 2023). While the potential for sustainable advancements through nanotechnology is immense, it also brings challenges concerning long-term sustainability. Introducing nanoparticles into agricultural systems raises critical considerations regarding their environmental impact, particularly their accumulation in ecosystems. Therefore, developing guidelines for the sustainable production and disposal of nanomaterials is vital. Addressing these environmental concerns proactively will help mitigate risks associated with their long-term use, ensuring that the benefits of nanotechnology can be realized without detrimental effects on the environment (Mahakham et al., 2017; Iavicoli et al., 2017).

The holistic view of how nanotechnology can revolutionize agriculture aligns with global narratives concerning food security, environmental health, and socio-economic development. With a worldwide population projected to reach 9.7 billion, agriculture must adapt to ensure sufficient food production while avoiding overexploitation of natural resources and compromising ecosystem integrity. Nanotechnology has offered significant advancements in crop yield and quality, aligning with sustainable agricultural goals by fostering environmentally responsible and economically viable practices (Aliev et al., 2021; Kumar et al., 2023; Gelaye, 2025). The implications of these innovations extend beyond crop enhancement; they address critical global objectives such as poverty alleviation, improved nutritional security, and the resilience of agricultural livelihoods against climate change (Aliev et al., 2021; Gelaye, 2025). The evidence supports the feasibility and utility of incorporating nanotechnology into agriculture as a promising approach toward meeting future agricultural demands sustainably and responsibly (Jiang et al., 2021; Kumar et al., 2023; El-Ramady et al., 2023).

Innovations made possible by nanotechnology closely resemble ecological agricultural concepts and climate-resilient practices, as they improve resource efficiency, reduce environmental pollution, and decrease dependency on traditional agrochemicals. Table 4 presents key sustainability focus areas where nanotechnology contributes to improved environmental outcomes and agricultural productivity. From innovative delivery systems that limit pesticide overuse to biodegradable nanomaterials that mitigate pollution, these technologies present compelling solutions to some of the most persistent challenges in modern agriculture. However, realizing their full potential requires addressing critical issues related to environmental safety, regulatory clarity, cost-effectiveness, and equitable access, particularly in regions dominated by smallholders.

Table 4

Table 4. Sustainability benefits of innovative nanotechnology for managing fungal diseases in agriculture.

6 Challenges and limitations of fungal nanotechnology in agriculture

The exciting potential of fungal nanotechnology in agriculture is matched by various challenges that must be addressed for successful implementation. The application of nanotechnology in fungal disease management faces a range of technical, regulatory, environmental, and social challenges that must be systematically addressed to ensure responsible and equitable deployment. Table 5 categorizes key limitations across these domains, highlighting issues such as high production costs, regulatory gaps, environmental persistence, and public skepticism. These barriers impact the scalability and sustainability of nano-enabled solutions, raising significant concerns about long-term safety, ecological balance, and access equity. One of the primary technical and practical challenges facing fungal nanotechnology is the scalability and cost-effectiveness of nanomaterial production. Effective deployment in agriculture requires efficient synthesis methods that can produce high-quality nanoparticles in large quantities without prohibitive costs. As highlighted by Kumar et al. (2023), the practical application of nanotechnology in agriculture relies on innovation and the development of scalable production processes that strike a balance between quality and cost efficiency.

Table 5

Table 5. Challenges and limitations of nanotechnology applications for fungal disease management in agriculture.

Furthermore, the physical and chemical stability of these nanoparticles under various environmental conditions poses a significant challenge. Factors such as UV radiation, temperature extremes, and humidity can affect the efficacy of nanomaterials in agricultural applications, creating the need for effective stabilization techniques (Tang et al., 2023). Mohanty et al. (2024) noted that without durability under such conditions, the anticipated benefits of using nanomaterials to enhance agricultural productivity could be compromised.

Consequently, the development of regulatory frameworks surrounding fungal nanotechnology is crucial, as existing regulations often fail to address the unique aspects of nanomaterials adequately. The complexity and novel properties of nanoparticles necessitate the establishment of targeted policies that incorporate comprehensive risk assessments explicitly tailored to these materials (Abd–Elsalam, 2024). Currently, regulatory gaps hinder the effective deployment of nanotechnology in agriculture, particularly in terms of safety and environmental impact assessments. There is a pressing need for global standards that can facilitate the safe application of these advanced technologies, which, as outlined by Abd–Elsalam (2024), is essential for ensuring public health while maintaining agricultural productivity and sustainability. Regulatory bodies lack a cohesive strategy to manage the potential risks associated with introducing nanoparticles into farming practices, creating an environment of uncertainty among stakeholders (Prasad et al., 2017).

Furthermore, research endeavors must prioritize understanding the fate and transport of nanomaterials in agricultural systems, as highlighted by Vijayakumar et al. (2022), to effectively evaluate their potential environmental impact. An interdisciplinary approach, combining fields such as toxicology, ecology, and nanotechnology, is crucial for addressing these complex challenges directly and developing strategies to mitigate associated risks (Elmeanawy et al., 2022). This is especially critical given that emerging technologies like fungal nanotechnology must ensure ecological integrity and sustainability while enhancing productivity. Failure to build public confidence may stall the integration of innovative technologies into agricultural practices, despite their potential to improve productivity and sustainability. Technical challenges associated with production and stability, regulatory gaps, safety and environmental concerns, and public perception issues collectively form a complex barrier that must be addressed through coordinated efforts from policymakers, researchers, and practitioners. This multifaceted approach is crucial to ensuring that the promise of fungal nanotechnology can be fully realized in promoting sustainable agricultural practices.

7.0 Stakeholder engagement, equity, and adoption pathways for nanotechnology in crop protection

7.1 Why equity and engagement matter in nanotechnology adoption for crop protection

Nanotechnology presents a transformative opportunity in agricultural science, offering innovative solutions to some of the pressing global challenges that farmers face, particularly those in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). The efficacy of such scientific innovations hinges on their technological advancements and their ability to engage with and be inclusive of the diverse stakeholder landscape within agricultural systems. Smallholder farmers, disproportionately affected by adversities such as fungal crop diseases, represent a critical demographic that must be explicitly considered in the broader nanotechnology adoption dialogue. Despite their pivotal role in global food security, these farmers often lack direct access to the advancements that nanotechnology affords, primarily due to socio-economic barriers and entrenched inequalities (Shang et al., 2019; Khundi et al., 2025). Integrating nanotechnology into crop protection can enhance sustainability, resilience, and productivity in agriculture (Ogwu and Kosoe, 2025). This claim is supported by research indicating that nanomaterials can improve pest control and increase crop yields by efficiently delivering nutrients and pesticides (Liu et al., 2021; Singh and Kumar, 2024; Mohanty et al., 2024). However, while these technologies may offer promising results on a macro scale, they tend to perpetuate existing inequities if the most vulnerable populations, such as smallholder farmers, are not actively engaged in discussions surrounding their development and implementation (Mohanty et al., 2024; Gelaye, 2025). Moreover, the knowledge gap in the application of these technologies can exacerbate inequitable access, leading to a situation where only those with resources can capitalize on the advancements of nanotechnology, leaving marginalized groups further behind (He et al., 2019).

7.2 Barriers to adoption

Several barriers hinder the adoption of nanotechnology in agriculture, particularly among smallholder farmers in LMICs. One of the most formidable obstacles is the high cost of developing and deploying nanomaterials (Kansotia et al., 2024; ElSayed et al., 2025). While nanotechnology can potentially reduce input costs over time, the initial investments for smallholder farmers can be prohibitive, particularly when the market is still predominantly driven by larger agricultural enterprises (Khundi et al., 2025; Rathore et al., 2024). However, it is worth noting that consumers often express hesitation towards novel technologies perceived as risky, underscoring a need for educational initiatives that responsibly communicate nanotechnology’s benefits and risks (Obahiagbon and Ogwu 2023; 2024). This hesitance is often rooted in limited public understanding, uncertainty about long-term health or environmental impacts, and broader distrust of technological interventions in food systems. Without proactive outreach and transparent communication, these concerns may hinder the adoption of promising nanotechnologies, particularly in regions where regulatory frameworks are still in development.

Hence, despite the potential cost savings associated with improved efficiency and reduced pesticide usage, the price tag attached to these materials can discourage uptake, posing an insurmountable barrier for resource-constrained farmers (Liu et al., 2021; Kumar et al., 2023). Additionally, the limited availability of extension services and trained professionals in rural areas exacerbates the challenge of integrating nanotechnology in agriculture. Many smallholder farmers rely heavily on local extension services for information and education regarding new agricultural practices. However, these services are often inadequate or absent in many regions, resulting in a significant knowledge gap regarding nanotechnology and its potential benefits (Singh et al., 2024; Lallawmkimi et al., 2025). This has resulted in a pervasive distrust of novel technologies, as farmers are often uncertain about the implications and safety of incorporating such materials into their farming practices (Mohanty et al., 2024; Gelaye, 2025).

Moreover, regulatory frameworks around using and disseminating nanotechnology in agricultural products can be slow to develop, delaying the introduction of innovative solutions and creating uncertainty among farmers (ElSayed et al., 2025; Rathore et al., 2024). Many countries lack legislation or guidance on registering nano-enabled agricultural products, which hampers local adoption initiatives. In addition, issues related to gender inequity in technology access further complicate the adoption landscape, as women—who constitute a significant portion of the agricultural workforce in many LMICs—often face additional barriers to accessing training and resources (Akinhanmi et al., 2023).

7.3 Stakeholder involvement and participatory approaches

Engaging diverse stakeholders in the research and development process is crucial for overcoming barriers to the adoption of nanotechnology in crop protection. Key stakeholders include farmers, cooperatives, extension officers, NGOs, and policymakers, all bringing unique perspectives and expertise (Singh et al., 2024). Initial stages of any technological development must prioritize participatory approaches that involve farmers directly, especially in context-sensitive regions where local knowledge and practices are invaluable. Strategies such as participatory technology design, where farmers actively contribute to creating and adapting new technologies, have shown promise in ensuring that innovations cater to actual needs rather than imposed solutions (Singh and Kumar, 2024; Tan et al., 2023). Farmer-led field trials are another effective strategy for fostering engagement and trust. Farmers can directly assess the advantages of nanotechnology applications by experimenting with them in controlled environments, which helps them make more informed decisions (Mohanty et al., 2024; Lallawmkimi et al., 2025). This farmer-centered approach builds capacity and encourages knowledge sharing within communities, enhancing overall trust in the technologies being introduced. Incorporating community feedback into product development processes is crucial for aligning these innovations with the practical realities farmers face. Solutions developed in close collaboration with end-users tend to have higher rates of acceptance and efficacy (Mohanty et al., 2024; Gelaye, 2025). Moreover, such participatory approaches promote transparency and accountability in the adoption of new technologies, fostering a sense of shared ownership among local communities, which can be instrumental in achieving equitable access to nanotechnology in agriculture (Elemike et al., 2019; Singh et al., 2024).

7.4 Equity in access to nanotechnology

Addressing equity in access to nanotechnology necessitates concerted efforts to bridge the digital divide and ensure effective technology transfer among marginalized communities. One promising avenue to foster inclusive access is the establishment of public-private partnerships to create subsidized programs that support smallholder farmers in adapting to nanotechnology (Campos et al., 2023; Singh and Kumar, 2024). These partnerships can leverage resources and expertise from both sectors, enhancing capacity-building efforts to empower farmers with the knowledge and tools necessary to implement these innovations. Open-access platforms that disseminate knowledge and resources related to nanotechnology in agriculture can further democratize this knowledge. These platforms can contribute to a broader understanding of the uses and advantages of nanotechnology by providing farmers and extension agents with readily available information, training materials, and research findings (Mohanty et al., 2024; Singh et al., 2024). Additionally, local manufacturing of nanomaterials can help reduce costs and increase accessibility while promoting sustainable practices by minimizing the environmental footprint associated with transporting these materials across borders (Kumar et al., 2023; Akinhanmi et al., 2023).

Moreover, targeted policies focusing on gender equity in access to technological advancements are essential for ensuring that all farmers, regardless of gender, can benefit from nanotechnology. Interventions such as specialized training programs, mentorships, and financial resources tailored to women farmers can empower them to harness the benefits of these innovations and contribute to a more equitable agricultural landscape (Gowda et al., 2024). The potential of nanotechnology can be fully realized by addressing these complex issues through inclusive practices and equitable regulations, ensuring that no one is left behind in the agricultural revolution (Kubiak et al., 2022; Rathore et al., 2024).

8 Future directions and policy recommendations for adopting nanotechnology solutions for managing fungal diseases in crops

As nanotechnology continues to revolutionize the management of plant fungal pathogens, its long-term success hinges on a strategic and inclusive roadmap that bridges scientific innovation with practical application. The future of fungal disease control will require advanced nanomaterials and delivery systems, supportive regulatory environments, robust public engagement, and cross-sector collaboration.

8.1 Advances in nanotechnology research for fungal disease control

The prospective integration of nanotechnology in combating fungal pathogens reveals significant potential, particularly in the agricultural sector, where traditional methods are proving insufficient. Novel nanomaterials, such as gold nanoparticles (AuNPs), have demonstrated promising antifungal properties by inhibiting key biological processes in pathogens like Candida albicans (Yu et al., 2016). Ongoing investigations into the mechanisms of action of these nanomaterials are crucial; for instance, AuNPs inhibit the activity of H⁺-ATPase, a crucial enzyme for fungal pathogenicity, demonstrating efficacy in preventing biofilm formation and host cell invasion (Yu et al., 2016). Further research is exploring other nanomaterial types, such as antimony-based compounds, which exhibit antifungal activity against resistant strains of pathogens like Cryptococcus neoformans, underscoring a broader trend toward using metal-based nanoparticles to combat multidrug-resistant fungal infections (Gerasimchuk et al., 2022).

Future applications will likely focus on sustainably harnessing these technologies for agricultural purposes. Adopting eco-friendly nanomaterials could reduce reliance on chemical fungicides, which negatively impact environmental health and contribute to the development of resistance in fungal populations (Zaki et al., 2021). For example, the use of zinc oxide nanoparticles synthesized through biotechnological means has demonstrated efficacy in controlling soil-borne pathogens, offering a green approach to disease management in crops such as cotton (Zaki et al., 2021). As these technologies evolve, they could significantly enhance crop resilience and yield while mitigating health risks associated with conventional antifungal treatments. Collaborative efforts among researchers, agricultural stakeholders, and policymakers would be essential to facilitate the incorporation of such innovations into standard farming practices. Public health protection will become increasingly intertwined with advancements in nanotechnology. The ongoing innovations in nanoparticle therapies, particularly in combating infections caused by Candida auris, highlight a critical need for optimized therapeutic options in both clinical and agricultural settings (Izadi et al., 2024). These technologies promise to revolutionize infection control by providing effective targeted therapies against increasingly resistant fungal strains. Therefore, continuous investment in research and the translation of laboratory findings into real-world applications will be vital to harnessing the full potential of nanotechnology in the fight against fungal diseases.

8.2 Policy framework for nanotechnology in agriculture

The rapid advancements in nanotechnology necessitate the establishment of comprehensive regulatory frameworks to ensure the safe integration of nanomaterials into agricultural practices. The significant benefits that nanotechnology offers for enhancing plant disease control must be balanced with potential risks to human health and the environment (Fisher and Denning, 2023). Current regulatory guidelines fail to adequately address the complexities associated with nanotechnology, particularly concerning their potential to interact unpredictably with biological systems. Effective policy frameworks must emerge from collaborations among agricultural stakeholders, health authorities, and researchers to prioritize public health while promoting innovation. For a successful regulatory landscape, transparent protocols should be established to evaluate the safety and efficacy of nanomaterials in agriculture. Priority should be given to research on the environmental impacts, bioaccumulation, and toxicity of nano-enabled products before they are widely deployed (Zhu et al., 2023).

Additionally, ongoing surveillance and monitoring practices will be necessary to assess the effectiveness and safety of these new technologies over time, particularly as pathogens evolve and resistance mechanisms emerge. Thus, these combined efforts would create a dynamic and responsive regulatory environment that could adapt to the evolving landscape of agricultural nanotechnology. Furthermore, international cooperation is crucial for developing coherent policies that address the global nature of both agricultural trade and pathogens. Global standards could facilitate the movement and adoption of innovative nanomaterials across borders while maintaining consistency in safety measures and efficacy assessments. Harmonizing these regulations can promote trust among stakeholders and consumers alike, ensuring that the implementation of nanotechnology in agriculture is conducted responsibly.

8.3 Public awareness and education on nanotechnology

Public understanding of and education about nanotechnology’s role in plant disease control are essential for the successful adoption of these innovations. Informing farmers and agricultural workers about the advantages and safe practices related to nanotechnology can empower them to make informed choices in their agricultural practices. Community engagement initiatives, encompassing workshops and training sessions, could serve as platforms to disseminate knowledge and foster dialogue about the benefits and risks associated with nanotechnology (Fisher et al., 2022). Awareness campaigns should focus on demystifying nanotechnology and articulating its benefits in enhancing crop resilience and reducing dependency on traditional, potentially harmful fungicides. Farmers can be educated about specific applications, such as using biogenic nanoparticles to enhance plant disease resistance while minimizing environmental impacts. This will enhance farmers’ capacity to manage fungal diseases effectively and encourage sustainable practices that safeguard public health and environmental safety.

Moreover, the transparency of information is crucial in enhancing public trust. Stakeholders in the agricultural sector must engage in open discussions regarding the regulatory frameworks governing nanotechnology, ensuring that all stakeholders have a voice in decision-making processes. Collaborations with educators, governmental bodies, and scientists can establish a comprehensive information network that boosts public confidence in these emerging technologies. Extensive educational materials and resources should be readily available to various communities engaging with agricultural practices to foster informed decision-making. This would aid farmers in the immediate application and encourage young researchers to explore the potential of nanotechnology further. As public awareness grows, the collective acceptance and application of nanotechnology in sustainable agriculture are likely to flourish, leading to healthier crops, improved public health outcomes, and enhanced food security.

9 Conclusion

Nanotechnology holds transformative potential in managing plant fungal pathogens, marking a critical shift from traditional chemical-based approaches toward more precise, sustainable, and health-conscious solutions. This paper outlines that various nanomaterials—including metallic nanoparticles, nanocarriers, and green-synthesized formulations—exhibit potent antifungal activity through membrane disruption, oxidative stress induction, and targeted delivery. These innovations not only enhance crop protection and yield but also reduce the reliance on harmful pesticides, contributing directly to improved food safety, environmental quality, and public health outcomes. However, the promise of nanotechnology must be tempered with caution. Challenges such as scalability, regulatory gaps, environmental persistence, and the potential for unintended health impacts must be addressed through rigorous interdisciplinary research, transparent policymaking, and the development of global safety standards. Only through a balanced approach that embraces both innovation and responsibility can the full benefits of agricultural nanotechnology be realized.

In light of climate change, growing global food demands, and new disease concerns, nanotechnology is expected to have a significant impact on agriculture in the future. We preserve plant health and advance more public health objectives by incorporating nanotech solutions into eco-friendly disease prevention techniques, early disease detection platforms, and sustainable farming systems. Nanotechnology has the potential to significantly transform the way we produce, preserve, and consume food as scientific understanding and legal frameworks evolve, making the agricultural system safer, healthier, and more resilient for everyone.

Author contributions

MO: Validation, Conceptualization, Investigation, Writing – review & editing, Writing – original draft. SI: Software, Writing – review & editing, Project administration, Funding acquisition, Validation, Resources, Supervision, Writing – original draft, Formal Analysis, Methodology, Visualization, Data curation, Investigation, Conceptualization.

Funding

The author(s) declare that no financial support was received for the research, and/or publication of this article.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

The author(s) declared that they were an editorial boaard member of Frontiers, at the time of submission. This had no impact on the peer review process and the final decision.

Publisher’s note

All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

References

Abd–Elsalam K. (2024). Special issue: agricultural nanotechnology. Plants 13, 489. doi: 10.3390/plants13040489

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Adebayo E., Azeez M., Alao M., Abel O., and Aina D. (2021). Fungi as a veritable tool in current advances in nanobiotechnology. Heliyon 7, e08480. doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2021.e08480

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Ajaz M., Rasool W., and Mahmood A. (2024). Comprehensive review of nanotechnology: innovations and multidisciplinary applications. Futuristic Biotechnol. 4, 12–18. doi: 10.54393/fbt.v4i01.81

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Akinhanmi F., Ayanda O., Ahuekwe E., and Dedeke G. (2023). Mitigating the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on crop farming: a nanotechnological approach. Agriculture 13, 1144. doi: 10.3390/agriculture13061144

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Alam M. W., Junaid P. M., Gulzar Y., Abebe B., Awad M., and Quazi S. A. (2024). Advancing agriculture with functional NM: “pathways to sustainable and smart farming technologies. Discover nano 19, 197. doi: 10.1186/s11671-024-04144-z

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Alazaiza M., Albahnasawi A., Ali G., Bashir M., Copty N., Amr S., et al. (2021). Recent advances of nanoremediation technologies for soil and groundwater remediation: a review. Water 13, 2186. doi: 10.3390/w13162186

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Alghuthaymi M., Almoammar H., Rai M., Said-Galiev É., and Abd–Elsalam K. (2015). Myconanoparticles: synthesis and their role in phytopathogen management. Biotechnol. Biotechnol. Equip. 29, 221–236. doi: 10.1080/13102818.2015.1008194

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Aliev B., Kazymov N., Aliev Z., Akhmedova K., Feyzullaeva G., Ismailova L., et al. (2021). Nanotechnology as one of the possible solutions to the problem of civilization or threat to humanity. Int. J. Res. Agron. 4, 101–104. doi: 10.33545/2618060x.2021.v4.i1a.127

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Almeida F., Rodrigues M. L., and Coelho C. (2019). The still underestimated problem of fungal diseases worldwide. Front. Microbiol. 10. doi: 10.3389/fmicb.2019.00214

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Azevedo M., Faria-Ramos I., Cruz L., Pina-Vaz C., and Rodrigues A. (2015). Genesis of azole antifungal resistance from agriculture to clinical settings. J. Agric. Food Chem. 63, 7463–7468. doi: 10.1021/acs.jafc.5b02728

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Bebber D. and Gurr S. (2015). Crop-destroying fungal and oomycete pathogens challenge food security. Fungal Genet. Biol. 74, 62–64. doi: 10.1016/j.fgb.2014.10.012

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Borehalli Mayegowda S., Roy A., N G M., Pandit S., Alghamdi S., Almehmadi M., et al. (2023). Eco-friendly synthesized nanoparticles as antimicrobial agents: an updated review. Front. Cell. infection Microbiol. 13. doi: 10.3389/fcimb.2023.1224778

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Bostrom A. and Löfstedt R. E. (2010). Nanotechnology risk communication: past and prologue. Risk analysis: an Off. Publ. Soc. Risk Anal. 30, 1645–1662. doi: 10.1111/j.1539-6924.2010.01521.x

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Bratovčić A., Hikal W., Mehdizadeh M., Ahl H., Omidi A., Adetunji C., et al. (2023). Application of nanotechnology in agroecosystems: nanoparticles for improving agricultural production. Rev. Agric. Sci. 11, 291–309. doi: 10.7831/ras.11.0_291

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Campos E., Ratko J., Bidyarani N., Takeshita V., and Fraceto L. (2023). Nature-based herbicides and micro-/nanotechnology fostering sustainable agriculture. ACS Sustain. Chem. Eng. 11, 9900–9917. doi: 10.1021/acssuschemeng.3c02282

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Chang Y., Harmon P. F., Treadwell D. D., Carrillo D., Sarkhosh A., and Brecht J. K. (2022). Biocontrol potential of essential oils in organic horticulture systems: from farm to fork. Front. Nutr. 8. doi: 10.3389/fnut.2021.805138

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Chang Q., Wang W., Regev-Yochay G., Lipsitch M., and Hanage W. (2014). Antibiotics in agriculture and the risk to human health: how worried should we be? Evolutionary Appl. 8, 240–247. doi: 10.1111/eva.12185

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Chaud M., Souto E. B., Zielinska A., Severino P., Batain F., Oliveira-Junior J., et al. (2021). Nanopesticides in agriculture: benefits and challenges in agricultural productivity, toxicological risks to human health and environment. Toxics 9, 131. doi: 10.3390/toxics9060131

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Checcucci A., Trevisi P., Luise D., Modesto M., Blasioli S., Braschi I., et al. (2020). Exploring the animal waste resistome: the spread of antimicrobial resistance genes through the use of livestock manure. Front. Microbiol. 11. doi: 10.3389/fmicb.2020.01416

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Chhipa H. (2017). Nanofertilizers and nanopesticides for agriculture. Environ. Chem. Lett. 15, 15–22. doi: 10.1007/s10311-016-0600-4

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Cruz-Luna A., Cruz-Martínez H., Vásquez-López A., and Medina D. (2021). Metal nanoparticles as novel antifungal agents for sustainable agriculture: current advances and future directions. J. Fungi 7, 1033. doi: 10.3390/jof7121033

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Cruz-Luna A., Vásquez-López A., Rojas-Chávez H., Valdés-Madrigal M., Cruz-Martínez H., and Medina D. (2023). Engineered metal oxide nanoparticles as fungicides for plant disease control. Plants 12, 2461. doi: 10.3390/plants12132461

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Das K., Jhan P., Das S., Aminuzzaman F., and Ayim B. (2021). Nanotechnology: past, present, and future prospects in crop protection. Intech Open. doi: 10.5772/intechopen.98703

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Dhillon G., Brar S., Kaur S., and Verma M. (2011). Green approach for nanoparticle biosynthesis by fungi: current trends and applications. Crit. Rev. Biotechnol. 32, 49–73. doi: 10.3109/07388551.2010.550568

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Duman H., Eker F., Akdaşçi E., Witkowska A. M., Bechelany M., and Karav S. (2024). Silver nanoparticles: A comprehensive review of synthesis methods and chemical and physical properties. Nanomaterials 14, 1527. doi: 10.3390/nano14181527

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Dutta P., Kumari A., Mahanta M., Upamanya G., Heisnam P., Borua S., et al. (2023). Nanotechnological approaches for management of soil-borne plant pathogens. Front. Plant Sci. 14. doi: 10.3389/fpls.2023.1136233

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Economou V. and Gousia P. (2015). Agriculture and food animals as a source of antimicrobial-resistant bacteria. Infection Drug Resistance 49. doi: 10.2147/idr.s55778

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Elemike E., Uzoh I., Onwudiwe D., and Babalola O. (2019). The role of nanotechnology in the fortification of plant nutrients and improvement of crop production. Appl. Sci. 9, 499. doi: 10.3390/app9030499

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Elmeanawy R., Elgendy A., and Zontahy W. (2022). The necessary concepts of nanotechnology for agricultural secondary schools students based on the expert community’s opinions. Int. J. Instructional Technol. Educ. Stud. 3, 11–19. doi: 10.21608/ihites.2022.111070.1087

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

El-Ramady H., Abdalla N., Sári D., Ferroudj A., Muthu A., Prokisch J., et al. (2023). Nanofarming: promising solutions for the future of the global agricultural industry. Agronomy 13, 1600. doi: 10.3390/agronomy13061600

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

ElSayed M., Ayoub H., Helal M., Sang W., Shen Z., and Abdelhafeez I. (2025). Nanotechnology-enabled soil management for sustainable agriculture: interactions, challenges, and prospects. Environ. Sci. Nano 12, 2128–2153. doi: 10.1039/d4en00943f

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

El-Tanani M., Satyam S. M., Rabbani S. A., El-Tanani Y., Aljabali A. A. A., Al Faouri I., et al. (2025). Revolutionizing drug delivery: the impact of advanced materials science and technology on precision medicine. Pharmaceutics 17, 375. doi: 10.3390/pharmaceutics17030375

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Evivie S. E., Ogwu M. C., Ebabhamiegbebho P. A., Abel E. S., Imaren J. O., and Igene J. O. (2020). “Packaging and the Nigerian food industry: challenges and opportunities.” in Food Technology and Culture in Africa. eds. Ogunlade C. A., Adeleke K. M., and Oladejo M. T.. (Ibadan, Nigeria: Reamsworth Publishing), pp. 28–99.

Google Scholar

Fisher M., Alastruey-Izquierdo A., Berman J., Bicanic T., Bignell E., Bowyer P., et al. (2022). Tackling the emerging threat of antifungal resistance to human health. Nat. Rev. Microbiol. 20, 557–571. doi: 10.1038/s41579-022-00720-1

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Fisher M. and Denning D. (2023). The WHO fungal priority pathogens list as a game-changer. Nat. Rev. Microbiol. 21, 211–212. doi: 10.1038/s41579-023-00861-x

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Garcia-Marin L. E., Juarez-Moreno K., Vilchis-Nestor A. R., and Castro-Longoria E. (2022). Highly Antifungal Activity of Biosynthesized Copper Oxide Nanoparticles against Candida albicans. Nanomaterials 12, 3856. doi: 10.3390/nano12213856

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Gelaye Y. (2025). Exploring the potential of agro-nanotechnology in African agriculture: a path to sustainable development—systematic review. Sci. World J. 2025. doi: 10.1155/tswj/9073364

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Gerasimchuk N., Pinks K., Salpadoru T., Cotton K., Michka O., Patrauchan M., et al. (2022). Non-antibiotic antimony-based antimicrobials. Molecules 27, 7171. doi: 10.3390/molecules27217171

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Girma A. (2023). Alternative mechanisms of action of metallic nanoparticles to mitigate the global spread of antibiotic-resistant bacteria. Cell surface (Amsterdam Netherlands) 10, 100112. doi: 10.1016/j.tcsw.2023.100112

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Godfray H. C., Mason-D’Croz D., and Robinson S. (2016). Food system consequences of a fungal disease epidemic in a major crop. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. London. Ser. B Biol. Sci. 371, 20150467. doi: 10.1098/rstb.2015.0467

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Gowda R., Roopashree B., Umarani K., and Sowmya K. (2024). Redgram resurgence—a perspective of nanotechnological approach. Environ. Ecol. 42, 248–254. doi: 10.60151/envec/luit8549

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Hamid A. and Saleem S. (2022). Role of nanoparticles in management of plant pathogens and scope in plant transgenics for imparting disease resistance. Plant Prot. Sci. 58, 173–184. doi: 10.17221/37/2020-pps

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Hani U., Choudhary V. T., Ghazwani M., Alghazwani Y., Osmani R. A. M., Kulkarni G. S., et al. (2024). Nanocarriers for delivery of anticancer drugs: current developments, challenges, and perspectives. Pharmaceutics 16, 1527. doi: 10.3390/pharmaceutics16121527

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Harish V., Ansari M. M., Tewari D., Gaur M., Yadav A. B., García-Betancourt M.-L., et al. (2022). Nanoparticle and nanostructure synthesis and controlled growth methods. Nanomaterials 12, 3226. doi: 10.3390/nano12183226

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Hasaneen M. (2023). Perspective chapter: recent advances in nanotechnology, nanomaterials, nanofertilizers, and smart farming. Intech Open. doi: 10.5772/intechopen.110170

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

He X., Deng H., and Hwang H. (2019). The current application of nanotechnology in food and agriculture. J. Food Drug Anal. 27, 1–21. doi: 10.1016/j.jfda.2018.12.002

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Iavicoli I., Leso V., Beezhold D. H., and Shvedova A. A. (2017). Nanotechnology in agriculture: Opportunities, toxicological implications, and occupational risks. Toxicol. Appl. Pharmacol. 329, 96–111. doi: 10.1016/j.taap.2017.05.025

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Ikhajiagbe B., Ogwu M. C., and Lawrence A. E. (2020). Single-tree influence of Tectonia grandis Linn. f. on plant distribution and soil characteristics in a planted forest. Bull. Natl. Res. Cent. 44, 29. doi: 10.1186/s42269-020-00285-0

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Izadi A., Paknia F., Roostaee M., Mousavi S., and Barani M. (2024). Advancements in nanoparticle-based therapies for multidrug-resistant candidiasis infections: a comprehensive review. Nanotechnology 35, 332001. doi: 10.1088/1361-6528/ad4bed

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Izah S. C. and Ogwu M. C. (2025). Modeling solutions for microbial water contamination in the global South for public health protection. Front. Microbiol. 16. doi: 10.3389/fmicb.2025.1504829

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Izah S. C. and Ogwu M. C. (2023). “Sustainable Utilization and Conservation of Africa’s Biological Resources and Environment. (First Edition).” Sustainable Development and Biodiversity Series volume 32 (Ramawat K.G.). (Singapore: Springer Nature), 691p. doi: 10.1007/978-981-19-6974-4

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Jagadeeshkumar G. (2025). Integrating nanotechnology into seed production and management for future-ready agriculture. Plant Sci. Today 12, 1–12. doi: 10.14719/pst.7116

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Jali P., Acharya S., and Mahalik G. (2024). Antimicrobial efficacy of nanoparticles for crop protection and sustainable agriculture. Discover Nano 19. doi: 10.1186/s11671-024-04059-9

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Jiang M., Song Y., Kanwar M., Ahammed G., Shao S., and Zhou J. (2021). Phytonanotechnology applications in modern agriculture. J. Nanobiotechnology 19. doi: 10.1186/s12951-021-01176-w

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Kang S., Sumabat L., Melie T., Mangum B., Momany M., and Brewer M. (2021). Evidence for the agricultural origin of resistance to multiple antimicrobials in Aspergillus fumigatus, a fungal pathogen of humans. G3 Genes|genome|genetics 12. doi: 10.1093/g3journal/jkab427

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Kansotia K., Naresh R., Sharma Y., Sekhar M., Sachan P., Baral K., et al. (2024). Nanotechnology-driven solutions: transforming agriculture for a sustainable and productive future. J. Sci. Res. Rep. 30, 32–51. doi: 10.9734/jsrr/2024/v30i31856

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Khan M., Khan A., Hasan M., Yadav K., Cabral-Pinto M., Malik N., et al. (2021). Agro-nanotechnology as an emerging field: a novel sustainable approach for improving plant growth by reducing biotic stress. Appl. Sci. 11, 2282. doi: 10.3390/app11052282

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Khan M. R. and Rizvi T. F. (2014). Nanotechnology: scope and application in plant disease management. J. Plant Pathol. 13, 214–231. doi: 10.3923/ppj.2014.214.231

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Khundi Q., Jiang Y., Sun Y., and Rui Y. (2025). Nanofertilizers for sustainable African agriculture: a global review of agronomic efficiency and environmental sustainability. Nanomaterials 15, 390. doi: 10.3390/nano15050390

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Kim D., Kadam A., Shinde S., Saratale R., Patra J., and Ghodake G. (2017). Recent developments in nanotechnology transforming the agricultural sector: a transition replete with opportunities. J. Sci. Food Agric. 98, 849–864. doi: 10.1002/jsfa.8749

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Kischkel B., Rossi S., Santos S., Nosanchuk J., Travassos L., and Taborda C. (2020). Therapies and vaccines based on nanoparticles for the treatment of systemic fungal infections. Front. Cell. Infection Microbiol. 10. doi: 10.3389/fcimb.2020.00463

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Kosoe E. A., Achana G. T. W., and Ogwu M. C. (2023). “Regulations and policies for herbal medicine and practitioners,” in Herbal medicine phytochemistry. Reference series in phytochemistry. Eds. Izah S. C., Ogwu M. C., and Akram M. (Springer, Cham). doi: 10.1007/978-3-031-21973-3_33-1

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Kristanti R., Liong R., and Hadibarata T. (2021). Soil remediation applications of nanotechnology. Trop. Aquat. Soil pollut. 1, 35–45. doi: 10.53623/tasp.v1i1.12

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Kubiak A., Wolna-Maruwka A., Niewiadomska A., and Pilarska A. (2022). The problem of weed infestation of agricultural plantations vs. the assumptions of the European biodiversity strategy. Agronomy 12, 1808. doi: 10.3390/agronomy12081808

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Kumar R., Kumar N., Rajput V. D., Mandzhieva S., Minkina T., Saharan B. S., et al. (2022). Advances in biopolymeric nanopesticides: A new eco-friendly/eco-protective perspective in precision agriculture. Nanomaterials (Basel Switzerland) 12, 3964. doi: 10.3390/nano12223964

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Kumar A., Singh G., Gourkhede P., Goutam P., Laxman T., Pandey S., et al. (2023). Revolutionizing agriculture: a comprehensive review of nanotechnology applications. Int. J. Environ. Climate Change 13, 3586–3603. doi: 10.9734/ijecc/2023/v13i113534

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Kumar P. and Ogwu M. C. (2025). "Regulatory Frameworks and Challenges for Edible Insects: Pathways to Mainstream Adoption," In: Edible Insects: Nutritional Benefits, Culinary Innovations and Sustainability. Ogwu M.C. and Izah S.C. (eds). Springer, Cham. doi: 10.1007/978-3-031-90087-7_8

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Kundu D., Dutta D., Joseph A., Jana A., Samanta P., Bhakta J. N., et al. (2024). Safeguarding drinking water: a brief insight on characteristics, treatments and risk assessment of contamination. Environ. Monit. Assess. 196, 180. doi: 10.1007/s10661-024-12179-z

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Kutawa A. B., Ahmad K., Ali A., Hussein M. Z., Abdul Wahab M. A., Adamu A., et al. (2021). Trends in nanotechnology and its potentialities to control plant pathogenic fungi: A review. Biology 10, 881. doi: 10.3390/biology10090881

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Lallawmkimi M., Patil S., Upadhyay D., Majumdar N., Abinaya B., Kumar G., et al. (2025). Application of nanotechnology in agriculture: opportunities and challenges in the context of environmental sustainability. Arch. Curr. Res. Int. 25, 37–53. doi: 10.9734/acri/2025/v25i11035

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Lekberg Y., Arnillas C., Borer E., Bullington L., Fierer N., Kennedy P., et al. (2021). Nitrogen and phosphorus fertilization consistently favor pathogenic over mutualistic fungi in grassland soils. Nat. Commun. 12. doi: 10.1038/s41467-021-23605-y

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Lemire J. A., Harrison J. J., and Turner R. J. (2013). Antimicrobial activity of metals: mechanisms, molecular targets and applications. Nat. Rev. Microbiol. 11, 371–384. doi: 10.1038/nrmicro3028

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Liu C., Zhou H., and Zhou J. (2021). The applications of nanotechnology in crop production. Molecules 26, 7070. doi: 10.3390/molecules26237070

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Madkour L. (2017). Ecofriendly green biosynthesized of metallic nanoparticles: bio-reduction mechanism, characterization, and pharmaceutical applications in biotechnology industry. Global Drugs Ther. 3. doi: 10.15761/gdt.1000144

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Mahakham W., Sarmah A., Maensiri S., and Theerakulpisut P. (2017). Nanopriming technology for enhancing germination and starch metabolism of aged rice seeds using phytosynthesized silver nanoparticles. Sci. Rep. 7. doi: 10.1038/s41598-017-08669-5

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Martínez G., Merinero M., Pérez-Aranda M., Pérez-Soriano E. M., Ortiz T., Begines B., et al. (2020). Environmental impact of nanoparticles’ Application as an emerging technology: A review. Materials (Basel Switzerland) 14, 166. doi: 10.3390/ma14010166

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Mehta A., Yadav A., Kumar A., and Kanika K. (2024). Role of nanotechnology in horticulture: an overview. Int. J. Advanced Biochem. Res. 8, 702–708. doi: 10.33545/26174693.2024.v8.i1i.481

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Mohammad Z., Ahmad F., Ibrahim S., and Zaidi S. (2022). Application of nanotechnology in different aspects of the food industry. Discover Food 2. doi: 10.1007/s44187-022-00013-9

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Mohammed A., Baz F., and Albrahim J. (2018). Calligonum comosum and Fusarium sp. extracts as bio-mediators in silver nanoparticle formation: characterization, antioxidant, and antibacterial capability. 3 Biotech. 8. doi: 10.1007/s13205-017-1046-5

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Mohanty L., Singh A., Pandey A., Kumar R., Ramesh G., Swamy G., et al. (2024). Harnessing nanotechnology for eco-friendly crop enhancement and sustainable agriculture. J. Exp. Agric. Int. 46, 154–167. doi: 10.9734/jeai/2024/v46i72568

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Mohsen L., Lilo R., and Alwan Z. (2022). Characterization and antifungal activity of silver nanoparticles mediated by fungi. J. Univ. Babylon Pure Appl. Sci. 30, 153–160. doi: 10.29196/jubpas.v30i2.4221

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Mosa M. A., Youssef K., Hamed S. F., and Hashim A. F. (2023). Antifungal activity of eco-safe nanoemulsions based on Nigella sativa oil against Penicillium verruscum infecting maize seeds: Biochemical and physiological traits. Front. Microbiol. 13. doi: 10.3389/fmicb.2022.1108733

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Nainnwal Y. (2025). Nanotechnology in agricultural yield expansion: a comprehensive review. Jabirian J. Biointerface Res. Pharmaceut. Appl. Chem. 1, 1–8. doi: 10.55559/jjbrpac.v1i6.460

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Narware J., Chakma J., Singh S. P., Prasad D. R., Meher J., Singh P., et al. (2025). Nanomaterial-based biosensors: a new frontier in plant pathogen detection and plant disease management. Front. Bioengineering Biotechnol. 13. doi: 10.3389/fbioe.2025.1570318

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Nazarov D., Kozlova L., Rogacheva E., Kraeva L., and Maximov M. (2023). Atomic layer deposition of antibacterial nanocoatings: A review. Antibiotics (Basel Switzerland) 12, 1656. doi: 10.3390/antibiotics12121656

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Nurtjahja K., Hastuti L., Purnamasari N., and Silitonga G. (2022). Fungal contamination and toxigenicity of Aspergillus flavus on postharvest cacao beans in northern Sumatra, Indonesia. Yüzüncü Yıl Üniversitesi Tarım Bilimleri Dergisi 32, 448–454. doi: 10.29133/yyutbd.1071092

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Obahiagbon E. G. and Ogwu M. C. (2024). "The Nexus of Business, Sustainability, and Herbal Medicine," in Herbal Medicine Phytochemistry. Izah S.C., Ogwu M.C., and Akram M. (eds). Reference Series in Phytochemistry. Springer, Cham. doi: 10.1007/978-3-031-21973-3_67-1

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Obahiagbon E. G. and Ogwu M. C. (2023). "Sustainable Supply Chain Management in the Herbal Medicine Industry," In Herbal Medicine Phytochemistry. Izah S.C., Ogwu M.C., and Akram M. (eds). Reference Series in Phytochemistry. Springer, Cham. doi: 10.1007/978-3-031-21973-3_64-1

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Ogwu M. C. (2025). "Science and Theory of Pollution: Sources, Pathways, Effects and Pollution Credit," In: Evaluating Environmental Processes and Technologies. Environmental Science and Engineering Series. Ogwu M.C. and Chibueze Izah S. (eds). Springer, Cham. doi: 10.1007/978-3-031-85327-2_5

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Ogwu M. C. and Izah S.C. (2023). “One Health Implications of Agrochemicals and their Sustainable Alternatives. (First Edition).” in Sustainable Development and Biodiversity Series volume 34. (Ramawat K.G.). (Singapore: Springer Nature), 826. doi: 10.1007/978-981-99-3439-3

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Ogwu M. C. and Izah S. C. (2025). Honey as a natural antimicrobial. Antibiotics 14, 255. doi: 10.3390/antibiotics14030255

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Ogwu M. C., Izah S. C., Aigberua A. O., and Ngun C. T. (2024). Editorial: Detection, risk analysis, and monitoring of chemical contaminants from agro-aqua food production and processing: Implications on the One Health triad. Front. Sustain. Food Syst. 8. doi: 10.3389/fsufs.2024.1501930

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Ogwu M. C., Izah S. C., Sawyer W. E., and Amabie T. (2025c). Environmental risk assessment of trace metal pollution: a statistical perspective. Environ. Geochemistry Health 47, 94. doi: 10.1007/s10653-025-02405-z

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Ogwu M. C. and Kosoe E. A. (2025). Integrating green infrastructure into sustainable agriculture to enhance soil health, biodiversity, and microclimate resilience. Sustainability 17, 3838. doi: 10.3390/su17093838

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Ogwu M. C. and Osawaru M. E. (2022). “Traditional methods of plant conservation for sustainable utilization and development.” in Biodiversity in Africa: Potentials, Threats and Conservation. Sustainable Development and Biodiversity, Volume 29. eds. Izah S. C.. (Singapore: Springer), pp. 451–472. doi: 10.1007/978-981-19-3326-4_17

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Oladeji O. A., Karigidi K. O., and Ogwu M. C. (2024). “Indices for monitoring and measuring the physicochemical properties of safe and quality food.” in Food Safety and Quality in the Global South. eds. Ogwu MC, Izah SC, and Ntuli NR. (Singapore: Springer), pp. 123–150. doi: 10.1007/978-981-97-2428-4_5

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Pachaiappan R., Rajendran S., Ramalingam G., Vo D., Priya P., and Soto-Moscoso M. (2021). Green synthesis of zinc oxide nanoparticles by Justicia adhatoda leaves and their antimicrobial activity. Chem. Eng. Technol. 44, 551–558. doi: 10.1002/ceat.202000470

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Panchangam R. and Upputuri R. (2019). In vitro biological activities of silver nanoparticles synthesized from Scedosporium sp. isolated from soil. Braz. J. Pharm. Sci. 55. doi: 10.1590/s2175-97902019000200254

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Parveen J., Sultana T., Kazmi A., Malik K., Ullah A., Ali A., et al. (2023). Phytosynthesized nanoparticles as novel antifungal agents for sustainable agriculture: a mechanistic approach, current advances, and future directions. J. Nanotechnology 2023, 1–16. doi: 10.1155/2023/8011189

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Patel D. K., Kim H. B., Dutta S. D., Ganguly K., and Lim K. T. (2020). Carbon nanotubes-based nanomaterials and their agricultural and biotechnological applications. Materials (Basel Switzerland) 13, 1679. doi: 10.3390/ma13071679

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Patra J. K., Das G., Fraceto L. F., Campos E. V. R., Rodriguez-Torres M. D. P., Acosta-Torres L. S., et al. (2018). Nano-based drug delivery systems: recent developments and future prospects. J. nanobiotechnology 16, 71. doi: 10.1186/s12951-018-0392-8

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Poznanski P., Hameed A., and Orczyk W. (2023). Chitosan and chitosan nanoparticles: parameters enhancing antifungal activity. Molecules (Basel Switzerland) 28, 2996. doi: 10.3390/molecules28072996

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Prasad R., Bhattacharyya A., and Nguyen Q. (2017). Nanotechnology in sustainable agriculture: recent developments, challenges, and perspectives. Front. Microbiol. 8. doi: 10.3389/fmicb.2017.01014

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Rahim H., Qaswar M., Uddin M., Giannini C., Herrera M., and Rea G. (2021). Nano-enabled materials promote sustainability and resilience in modern agriculture. Nanomaterials 11, 2068. doi: 10.3390/nano11082068

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Rai M., Bonde S., Golińska P., Trzcińska-Wencel J., Gade A., Abd–Elsalam K., et al. (2021). Fusarium as a novel fungus for the synthesis of nanoparticles: mechanism and applications. J. Fungi 7, 139. doi: 10.3390/jof7020139

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Rai M., Yadav A., and Gade A. (2009). Silver nanoparticles as a new generation of antimicrobials. Biotechnol. Adv. 27, 76–83. doi: 10.1016/j.biotechadv.2008.09.002

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Rani J., Rasool A., Sher H., Fatima R., Hussain J., Majeed M., et al. (2024). Precision farming with nanoscale sensors. (Pennsylvania USA: IGI Global), 78–99. doi: 10.4018/979-8-3693-1890-4.ch005

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Rathore A., Hasan W., Ramesha N., Pujar K., Singh R., Panotra N., et al. (2024). Nanotech for crop protection: utilizing nanoparticles for targeted pesticide delivery. Uttar Pradesh J. Zoology 45, 46–71. doi: 10.56557/upjoz/2024/v45i63950

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Ray M., Mishra A., Mohanta Y., Mahanta S., Chakrabartty I., Kungwani N., et al. (2023). Nanotechnology as a promising tool against phytopathogens: a futuristic approach to agriculture. Agriculture 13, 1856. doi: 10.3390/agriculture13091856

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Rezghi Rami M., Forouzandehdel S., and Aalizadeh F. (2024). Enhancing biodegradable smart food packaging: Fungal-synthesized nanoparticles for stabilizing biopolymers. Heliyon 10, e37692. doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e37692

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Rizou M., Galanakis I. M., Aldawoud T. M. S., and Galanakis C. M. (2020). Safety of foods, food supply chain, and environment within the COVID-19 pandemic. Trends Food Sci. Technol. 102, 293–299. doi: 10.1016/j.tifs.2020.06.008

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Ruffo Roberto S., Youssef K., Hashim A. F., and Ippolito A. (2019). Nanomaterials as alternative control means against postharvest diseases in fruit crops. Nanomaterials (Basel Switzerland) 9, 1752. doi: 10.3390/nano9121752

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Safdar M., Kim W., Park S., Gwon Y., Kim Y.-O., and Kim J. (2022). Engineering plants with carbon nanotubes: a sustainable agriculture approach. J. Nanobiotechnol 20, 275. doi: 10.1186/s12951-022-01483-w

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Salam M. A., Al-Amin M. Y., Salam M. T., Pawar J. S., Akhter N., Rabaan A. A., et al. (2023). Antimicrobial resistance: A growing serious threat for global public health. Healthcare (Basel Switzerland) 11, 1946. doi: 10.3390/healthcare11131946

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Santos T., Passos E., Seabra M., Souto E., Severino P., and Mendonça M. (2021). Entomopathogenic fungi biomass production and extracellular biosynthesis of silver nanoparticles for bioinsecticide action. Appl. Sci. 11, 2465. doi: 10.3390/app11062465

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Scortichini M. (2022). Sustainable management of diseases in horticulture: conventional and new options. Horticulturae 8, 517. doi: 10.3390/horticulturae8060517

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Shahid A., Faizan M., and Raza M. (2023). Potential role of silver nanoparticles (AgNPs) and zinc nanoparticles (ZnNPs) for plant disease management. Agrobiological Records 14, 59–69. doi: 10.47278/journal.abr/2023.039

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Shang Y., Hasan M., Ahammed G., Li M., Yin H., and Zhou J. (2019). Applications of nanotechnology in plant growth and crop protection: a review. Molecules 24, 2558. doi: 10.3390/molecules24142558

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Sharma R., Kumar A., Devgan M., Kaur A., Kaur H., Choudhary A., et al. (2022). Applications of nanostructured materials in agriculture: a review. Materials Today: Proceedings 69, 549–555

Google Scholar

Sharma S., Yadav A., Yadav M., and Verma S. (2024). Revolutionizing agriculture with nanotechnology: advances, applications, and sustainability considerations. Int. J. Environ. Climate Change 14, 1–9. doi: 10.9734/ijecc/2024/v14i74246

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Shen L., Li B., and Qiao Y. (2018). Fe₃O₄ Nanoparticles in targeted drug/gene delivery systems. Materials (Basel Switzerland) 11, 324. doi: 10.3390/ma11020324

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Shen H., Maeda M., Nagamine T., Wang X., Shiratori Y., and Senoo K. (2022). Mites as a natural weapon against soil-borne fungal diseases. doi: 10.21203/rs.3.rs-2190793/v1

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Silva L. F. O., Santosh M., Schindler M., Gasparotto J., Dotto G. L., Oliveira M. L. S., et al. (2021). Nanoparticles in fossil and mineral fuel sectors and their impact on environment and human health: a review and perspective. Gondwana Research 92, 184–201. doi: 10.1016/j.gr.2020.12.020

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Singh O. (2023). Nanotechnology for sustainability and food security in agriculture. (Pennsylvania USA: IGI Global), 315–339. doi: 10.4018/978-1-6684-7232-3.ch014

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Singh H., Desimone M. F., Pandya S., Jasani S., George N., Adnan M., et al. (2023). Revisiting the green synthesis of nanoparticles: uncovering influences of plant extracts as reducing agents for enhanced synthesis efficiency and its biomedical applications. Int. J. nanomedicine 18, 4727–4750. doi: 10.2147/IJN.S419369

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Singh N. and Kumar A. (2024). Enhancing crop productivity through nanotechnology: a comprehensive review of strategies and results. J. Exp. Agric. Int. 46, 435–458. doi: 10.9734/jeai/2024/v46i52395

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Singh A., Patel A., and Minocha N. (2025). Nano innovation: enhancing food packaging through nanotechnology. Curr. Nanoscience 21, 957–971. doi: 10.2174/0115734137314364240920052006

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Singh B. K., Tiwari S., and Dubey N. K. (2021). Essential oils and their nanoformulations as green preservatives to boost food safety against mycotoxin contamination of food commodities: a review. J. Sci. Food Agric. 101, 4879–4890. doi: 10.1002/jsfa.11255

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Singh M., Upadhyay L., Badekhan A., Shil S., Gautam S., Anand A., et al. (2024). Leveraging remote sensing and nanotechnology to overcome barriers to agroforestry adoption by smallholder farmers. J. Sci. Res. Rep. 30, 113–140. doi: 10.9734/jsrr/2024/v30i51928

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Soni A., Kushvaha R., and Snehi S. (2024). Current strategies for management of plant viruses and future perspectives: enhancing crop health, yield, and productivity. Asian J. Biochem. Genet. Mol. Biol. 16, 21–34. doi: 10.9734/ajbgmb/2024/v16i4368

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Srivastava S., Mehta C., Rana M., Banik D., Rajput V., and Konstantinova E. (2024). Nanotechnology and soil health. (Pennsylvania USA: IGI Global), 24–42. doi: 10.4018/979-8-3693-1471-5.ch002

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Sun Q., Li J., and Le T. (2018). Zinc oxide nanoparticles as a novel class of antifungal agents: current advances and future perspectives. J. Agric. Food Chem. 66, 11209–11220. doi: 10.1021/acs.jafc.8b03210

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Sundararajan N., Habeebsheriff H. S., Dhanabalan K., Cong V. H., Wong L. S., Rajamani R., et al. (2023). Mitigating global challenges: harnessing green synthesized nanomaterials for sustainable crop production systems. Global challenges (Hoboken NJ) 8, 2300187. doi: 10.1002/gch2.202300187

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Suryani A., Daud I., Melina M., Dewi V., Sari D., Putri S., et al. (2023). “Harnessing the potential of nanobiopesticides with plant extracts: a review,” in Iop Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science, Vol. 1272. 012042. doi: 10.1088/1755-1315/1272/1/012042

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Tan J., Zhao S., Chen J., Pan X., Li C., Liu Y., et al. (2023). Preparation of nitrogen-doped carbon dots and their enhancement on lettuce yield and quality. J. Materials Chem. B 11, 3113–3123. doi: 10.1039/d2tb02817d

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Tang Y., Zhao W., Zhu G., Tan Z., Huang L., Zhang P., et al. (2023). Nano-pesticides and fertilizers: solutions for global food security. Nanomaterials 14, 90. doi: 10.3390/nano14010090

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Tripathi S., Mahra S., Jonathan V., Tiwari K., Rana S., Tripathi D., et al. (2023). Recent advances and perspectives of nanomaterials in agricultural management and associated environmental risk: a review. Nanomaterials 13, 1604. doi: 10.3390/nano13101604

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Tyagi P., Arya A., Ramniwas S., and Tyagi S. (2023). Editorial: recent trends in nanotechnology in precision and sustainable agriculture. Front. Plant Sci. 14. doi: 10.3389/fpls.2023.1256319

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Vijayakumar M., Surendhar G., Natrayan L., Patil P., Ram P., and Paramasivam P. (2022). Evolution and recent scenario of nanotechnology in agriculture and food industries. J. Nanomaterials 2022. doi: 10.1155/2022/1280411

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Vijayreddy D., Dutta P., and Puzari K. (2023). Nanotechnology in plant disease management. Res. Biotica 5, 56–62. doi: 10.54083/resbio/5.2.2023/56-62

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Wahab S., Salman A., Khan Z., Khan S., Krishnaraj C., and Yun S. (2023). Metallic nanoparticles: a promising arsenal against antimicrobial resistance—unraveling mechanisms and enhancing medication efficacy. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 24, 14897. doi: 10.3390/ijms241914897

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Wang J., Wu H., Wang Y., Ye W., Kong X., and Yin Z. (2024). Small particles, big effects: how nanoparticles can enhance plant growth in favorable and harsh conditions. J. Integr. Plant Biol. 66, 1274–1294. doi: 10.1111/jipb.13652

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Worrall E. A., Hamid A., Mody K. T., Mitter N., and Pappu H. R. (2018). Nanotechnology for plant disease management. Agronomy 8, 285. doi: 10.3390/agronomy8120285

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Yadav A., Yadav K., Ahmad R., and Abd-Elsalam K. A. (2023). Emerging frontiers in nanotechnology for precision agriculture: advancements, hurdles, and prospects. Agrochemicals 2, 220–256. doi: 10.3390/agrochemicals2020016

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Yamini V., Shanmugam V., Rameshpathy M., Venkatraman G., Ramanathan G., Al Garalleh H., et al. (2023). Environmental effects and interaction of nanoparticles on beneficial soil and aquatic microorganisms. Environ. Res. 236, 116776. doi: 10.1016/j.envres.2023.116776

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Yang J., Hou B., Wang J., Tian B., Bi J., Wang N., et al. (2019). Nanomaterials for the removal of heavy metals from wastewater. Nanomaterials 9, 424. doi: 10.3390/nano9030424

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Yu Q., Li J., Zhang Y., Wang Y., Liu L., and Li M. (2016). Inhibition of gold nanoparticles (AuNPs) on pathogenic biofilm formation and invasion to host cells. Sci. Rep. 6. doi: 10.1038/srep26667

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Zahid M., Abbasi M., Zahid T., Tariq T., Erum S., Irum S., et al. (2022). A comprehensive review of the synthesis and antimicrobial properties of food nanopackaging. Plant Health 1, 17–24. doi: 10.33687/planthealth.01.01.4535

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Zaki S., Ouf S., Albarakaty F., Habeb M., Aly A., and Abd–Elsalam K. (2021). Trichoderma harzianum-mediated ZnO nanoparticles: a green tool for controlling soil-borne pathogens in cotton. J. Fungi 7, 952. doi: 10.3390/jof7110952

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Zhang X., Li G., Wu D., Liu J., and Wu Y. (2020). Recent advances on emerging nanomaterials for controlling the mycotoxin contamination: from detection to elimination. Food Front. 1, 360–381. doi: 10.1002/fft2.42

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Zhang J., Zhang S., Liu M., Yang Z., and Huang R. (2024). Research progress on ferroptosis and nanotechnology-based treatment in triple-negative breast cancer. Breast Cancer (Dove Medical Press) 16, 347–358. doi: 10.2147/BCTT.S475199

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Zhao H., Su H., Ahmeda A., Sun Y., Li Z., Zangeneh M., et al. (2020). Biosynthesis of copper nanoparticles using Allium eriophyllum Boiss leaf aqueous extract; characterization and analysis of their antimicrobial and cutaneous wound-healing potentials. Appl. Organometallic Chem. 36. doi: 10.1002/aoc.5587

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Zhou X.-Q., Hayat Z., Zhang D.-D., Li M.-Y., Hu S., Wu Q., et al. (2023). Zinc oxide nanoparticles: synthesis, characterization, modification, and applications in food and agriculture. Processes 11, 1193. doi: 10.3390/pr11041193

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Zhu X., Chen Y., Yu D., Fang W., Liao W., and Pan W. (2023). Progress in the application of nanoparticles for the treatment of fungal infections: a review. Mycology: Int. J. Fungal Biol. 15, 1–16. doi: 10.1080/21501203.2023.2285764

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar