pesticides (Savary et al. 2012). Total losses caused by pests amounted to 26–28% for
soybean and wheat and 31%, 37%, and 40% for maize, rice, and potatoes, respectively (Oerke 2006). The use of nanotechnology in agriculture to protect crops
against pests appears to be a new, attractive option (Khot et al. 2012; Ragaei and
Sabry Al-Kazafy 2014; Abd-Elsalam and Prasad 2018, 2019). The two main
directions of use of nanotechnology in the production of pesticides are
nanoformulations constituting nanocarriers of active ingredients (AIs) or
nanocompounds with biocidal effect.
Nanocarriers protect pesticides against unfavorable environmental conditions
(high temperature, radiation) while at the same time increasing their chemical
stability. They can also improve the dispersion and wettability of pesticides and
reduce the risk of pesticides being washed off plants. Nanoformulations increase
surface area, thermal stability, biodegradability, and affinity with regard to target
species (Prasad et al. 2019). Smart systems for the delivery of pesticides may be
characterized by the controlled release of AIs over time or spatially conditioned
release or also result in better penetration through biological barriers, which is
unachievable for conventional pesticides. The main function of a nanocarrier or
nanoencapsulation is to protect AIs against their release and to improve solubility
and tissue penetration. This fits perfectly with practices of sustainable agriculture
and the principles of integrated plant protection – small, targeted doses and the
absence of any residues in the environment – and as a result, the impact on organisms
and people is positive (Xu et al. 2010; Kah and Hofman 2014; Vijayalakshmi et al.
2015; Nuruzzaman et al. 2016; Bhattacharyya et al. 2016; Kumar et al. 2019).
Nanoencapsulation of AIs protects against degradation and improves the effectiveness of pesticides (Nuruzzaman et al. 2016). Similarly, nanoemulsions, in other
words colloidal systems with very fine internal phase particles, increase the solubility of AIs in biocidal products while maintaining the concentration of surfactants at a
lower level than in microemulsions (5–10% of surfactant required in nanoemulsions,
compared to 20% in microemulsions) (Song et al. 2009; Yang et al. 2009; Anjali
et al. 2010; Xu et al. 2010). Nanoencapsulated pesticides also display greater
resistance to changing atmospheric conditions compared to their conventional
counterparts (Choi et al. 2011).
The insecticidal effectiveness of liposome-based agents has been described by
Hwang et al. (2011). The initial effectiveness of liposomes in controlling pests was
similar to that of conventional pesticides (100% mortality observed). However, after
13 days, the effectiveness of the commercial pesticide decreased significantly, while
the pesticide containing liposome retained 50% of its effectiveness. The longer
effectiveness can be explained by the slower rate of release of AIs and the protection
of unstable AIs resulting therefrom. Teodoro et al. (2010) studied the insecticidal
activity of Al 2 O 3 NPs against selected pests in stocks of food in storage. Three days
after the treatment of wheat with Al 2 O 3 NPs, mortality of the species Sarocladium
oryzae and Rhyzopertha dominica was observed. In turn, the effectiveness of
polyethylene glycol-coated nanoparticles loaded with garlic oil against Tribolium
castaneum was 80%, while the effectiveness of garlic oil alone was 11% (Yang et al.
2009). Adak et al. (2012) investigated the effect of a nanoencapsulated formulation
1 Nanotechnology in Agriculture, the Food Sector, and Remediation: Prospects,. . .
7
soybean and wheat and 31%, 37%, and 40% for maize, rice, and potatoes, respectively (Oerke 2006). The use of nanotechnology in agriculture to protect crops
against pests appears to be a new, attractive option (Khot et al. 2012; Ragaei and
Sabry Al-Kazafy 2014; Abd-Elsalam and Prasad 2018, 2019). The two main
directions of use of nanotechnology in the production of pesticides are
nanoformulations constituting nanocarriers of active ingredients (AIs) or
nanocompounds with biocidal effect.
Nanocarriers protect pesticides against unfavorable environmental conditions
(high temperature, radiation) while at the same time increasing their chemical
stability. They can also improve the dispersion and wettability of pesticides and
reduce the risk of pesticides being washed off plants. Nanoformulations increase
surface area, thermal stability, biodegradability, and affinity with regard to target
species (Prasad et al. 2019). Smart systems for the delivery of pesticides may be
characterized by the controlled release of AIs over time or spatially conditioned
release or also result in better penetration through biological barriers, which is
unachievable for conventional pesticides. The main function of a nanocarrier or
nanoencapsulation is to protect AIs against their release and to improve solubility
and tissue penetration. This fits perfectly with practices of sustainable agriculture
and the principles of integrated plant protection – small, targeted doses and the
absence of any residues in the environment – and as a result, the impact on organisms
and people is positive (Xu et al. 2010; Kah and Hofman 2014; Vijayalakshmi et al.
2015; Nuruzzaman et al. 2016; Bhattacharyya et al. 2016; Kumar et al. 2019).
Nanoencapsulation of AIs protects against degradation and improves the effectiveness of pesticides (Nuruzzaman et al. 2016). Similarly, nanoemulsions, in other
words colloidal systems with very fine internal phase particles, increase the solubility of AIs in biocidal products while maintaining the concentration of surfactants at a
lower level than in microemulsions (5–10% of surfactant required in nanoemulsions,
compared to 20% in microemulsions) (Song et al. 2009; Yang et al. 2009; Anjali
et al. 2010; Xu et al. 2010). Nanoencapsulated pesticides also display greater
resistance to changing atmospheric conditions compared to their conventional
counterparts (Choi et al. 2011).
The insecticidal effectiveness of liposome-based agents has been described by
Hwang et al. (2011). The initial effectiveness of liposomes in controlling pests was
similar to that of conventional pesticides (100% mortality observed). However, after
13 days, the effectiveness of the commercial pesticide decreased significantly, while
the pesticide containing liposome retained 50% of its effectiveness. The longer
effectiveness can be explained by the slower rate of release of AIs and the protection
of unstable AIs resulting therefrom. Teodoro et al. (2010) studied the insecticidal
activity of Al 2 O 3 NPs against selected pests in stocks of food in storage. Three days
after the treatment of wheat with Al 2 O 3 NPs, mortality of the species Sarocladium
oryzae and Rhyzopertha dominica was observed. In turn, the effectiveness of
polyethylene glycol-coated nanoparticles loaded with garlic oil against Tribolium
castaneum was 80%, while the effectiveness of garlic oil alone was 11% (Yang et al.
2009). Adak et al. (2012) investigated the effect of a nanoencapsulated formulation
1 Nanotechnology in Agriculture, the Food Sector, and Remediation: Prospects,. . .
7