Perspective | Published:

Opportunities and challenges for nanotechnology in the agri-tech revolution

Abstract

Current agricultural practices, developed during the green revolution, are becoming unsustainable, especially in the face of climate change and growing populations. Nanotechnology will be an important driver for the impending agri-tech revolution that promises a more sustainable, efficient and resilient agricultural system, while promoting food security. Here, we present the most promising new opportunities and approaches for the application of nanotechnology to improve the use efficiency of necessary inputs (light, water, soil) for crop agriculture, and for better managing biotic and abiotic stress. Potential development and implementation barriers are discussed, emphasizing the need for a systems approach to designing proposed nanotechnologies.

Access optionsAccess options

Rent or Buy article

Get time limited or full article access on ReadCube.

from$8.99

All prices are NET prices.

References

  1. 1.

    World Agricultural Production Circular Series WAP 4-18 (USDA, 2018).

  2. 2.

    Willett, W. et al. Food in the Anthropocene: the EAT–Lancet Commission on healthy diets from sustainable food systems. Lancet 393, 447–492 (2019).

  3. 3.

    Zhang, W. Global pesticide use: profile, trend, cost/benefit and more. Proc. Int. Acad. Ecol. Environ. Sci. 8, 1–27 (2018).

  4. 4.

    AQUASTAT Water Withdrawal by Sector 1–2 (FAO, 2012); http://www.fao.org/nr/water/aquastat/data/

  5. 5.

    International Energy Outlook 2016 Vol. 0484 (US EIA, 2016).

  6. 6.

    FAOSTAT Food balance sheets: Cambodia (FAO, 2014).

  7. 7.

    Science Breakthroughs to Advance Food and Agricultural Research by 2030 (National Academies Press, 2018).

  8. 8.

    Diaz, R. J. & Rosenberg, R. Spreading dead zones and consequences for marine ecosystems. Science 321, 926–929 (2008).

  9. 9.

    Klarich, K. L. et al. Occurrence of neonicotinoid insecticides in finished drinking water and fate during drinking water treatment. Environ. Sci. Technol. Lett. 4, 168–173 (2017).

  10. 10.

    Pinder, R. W., Anderson, N. J., Strader, R., Davidson, C. I. & Adams, P. J. Ammonia Emissions from Dairy Farms: Development of a Farm Model and Estimation of Emissions from the United States (EPA, 1998).

  11. 11.

    Pimentel, D. & Burgess, M. Soil erosion threatens food production. Agriculture 3, 443–463 (2013).

  12. 12.

    Summary Report: 2015 National Resources Inventory (US Department of Agriculture, 2018).

  13. 13.

    Beketov, M. A., Kefford, B. J., Schafer, R. B. & Liess, M. Pesticides reduce regional biodiversity of stream invertebrates. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 110, 11039–11043 (2013).

  14. 14.

    Goulson, D. An overview of the environmental risks posed by neonicotinoid insecticides. J. Appl. Ecol. 50, 977–987 (2013).

  15. 15.

    Jaganathan, D., Ramasamy, K., Sellamuthu, G., Jayabalan, S. & Venkataraman, G. CRISPR for crop improvement: an update review. Front. Plant Sci. 9, 985 (2018).

  16. 16.

    Glick, B. R. Plant growth-promoting bacteria: mechanisms and applications. Scientifica 2012, 1–15 (2012).

  17. 17.

    Giraldo, J. P., Wu, H., Newkirk, G. M. & Kruss, S. Nat. Nanotechnol. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41565-019-0470-6 (2019).

  18. 18.

    Alexander, P. et al. Losses, inefficiencies and waste in the global food system. Agric. Syst. 153, 190–200 (2017).

  19. 19.

    Kah, M., Tufenkji, N. & White, J. C. Nano-enabled strategies to enhance crop nutrition and protection. Nat. Nanotechnol. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41565-019-0439-5 (2019).

  20. 20.

    Siebert, S. & Döll, P. Quantifying blue and green virtual water contents in global crop production as well as potential production losses without irrigation. J. Hydrol. 384, 198–217 (2010).

  21. 21.

    Vörösmarty, C. J., Green, P., Salisbury, J. & Lammers, R. B. Global water resources: vulnerability from climate change and population growth. Science 289, 284–288 (2000).

  22. 22.

    Alvarez, P. J. J., Chan, C. K., Elimelech, M., Halas, N. J. & Villagrán, D. Emerging opportunities for nanotechnology to enhance water security. Nat. Nanotechnol. 13, 634–641 (2018).

  23. 23.

    Wang, P. Emerging investigator series: the rise of nano-enabled photothermal materials for water evaporation and clean water production by sunlight. Environ. Sci. Nano. 5, 1078–1089 (2018).

  24. 24.

    Villagarcia, H., Dervishi, E., De Silva, K., Biris, A. S. & Khodakovskaya, M. V. Surface chemistry of carbon nanotubes impacts the growth and expression of water channel protein in tomato plants. Small 8, 2328–2334 (2012).

  25. 25.

    Zhou, L. et al. Fabrication of a high-performance fertilizer to control the loss of water and nutrient using micro/nano networks. ACS Sustain. Chem. Eng. 3, 645–653 (2015).

  26. 26.

    Rodrigues, S. M. et al. Nanotechnology for sustainable food production: promising opportunities and scientific challenges. Environ. Sci. Nano 4, 767–781 (2017).

  27. 27.

    Plazas-Tuttle, J., Das, D., Sabaraya, I. V. & Saleh, N. B. Harnessing the power of microwaves for inactivating Pseudomonas aeruginosa with nanohybrids. Environ. Sci. Nano 5, 72–82 (2018).

  28. 28.

    Zhu, X. G., Ort, D. R., Whitmarsh, J. & Long, S. P. The slow reversibility of photosystem II thermal energy dissipation on transfer from high to low light may cause large losses in carbon gain by crop canopies: a theoretical analysis. J. Exp. Bot. 55, 1167–1175 (2004).

  29. 29.

    Long, S. P., Marshall-Colon, A. & Zhu, X. G. Meeting the global food demand of the future by engineering crop photosynthesis and yield potential. Cell 161, 56–66 (2015).

  30. 30.

    Giraldo, J. P. et al. Plant nanobionics approach to augment photosynthesis and biochemical sensing. Nat. Mater. 13, 400–408 (2014).

  31. 31.

    Xiong, J. L., Li, J., Wang, H. C., Zhang, C. L. & Naeem, M. S. Fullerol improves seed germination, biomass accumulation, photosynthesis and antioxidant system in Brassica napus L. under water stress. Plant Physiol. Biochem. 129, 130–140 (2018).

  32. 32.

    Raliya, R., Nair, R., Chavalmane, S., Wang, W. N. & Biswas, P. Mechanistic evaluation of translocation and physiological impact of titanium dioxide and zinc oxide nanoparticles on the tomato (Solanum lycopersicum L.) plant. Metallomics 7, 1584–1594 (2015).

  33. 33.

    Wu, H., Tito, N. & Giraldo, J. P. Anionic cerium oxide nanoparticles protect plant photosynthesis from abiotic stress by scavenging reactive oxygen species. ACS Nano 11, 11283–11297 (2017).

  34. 34.

    Myers, S. S. et al. Increasing CO2 threatens human nutrition. Nature 510, 139–142 (2014).

  35. 35.

    Amenumey, S. E. & Capel, P. D. Fertilizer consumption and energy input for 16 crops in the United States. Nat. Resour. Res. 23, 299–309 (2014).

  36. 36.

    Urso, J. H. & Gilbertson, L. M. Atom conversion efficiency: a new sustainability metric applied to nitrogen and phosphorus use in agriculture. ACS Sustain. Chem. Eng. 6, 4453–4463 (2018).

  37. 37.

    Smith, A. M. & Gilbertson, L. M. Rational ligand design to improve agrochemical delivery efficiency and advance agriculture sustainability. ACS Sustain. Chem. Eng. 6, 13599–13610 (2018).

  38. 38.

    Kottegoda, N. et al. Urea-hydroxyapatite nanohybrids for slow release of nitrogen. ACS Nano 11, 1214–1221 (2017).

  39. 39.

    Yuvaraj, M. & Subramanian, K. S. Controlled-release fertilizer of zinc encapsulated by a manganese hollow core shell. Soil Sci. Plant Nutr. 61, 319–326 (2014).

  40. 40.

    Elmer, W. H. & White, J. C. The use of metallic oxide nanoparticles to enhance growth of tomatoes and eggplants in disease infested soil or soilless medium. Environ. Sci. Nano 3, 1072–1079 (2016).

  41. 41.

    Dimkpa, C. O., White, J. C., Elmer, W. H. & Gardea-Torresdey, J. Nanoparticle and ionic Zn promote nutrient loading of sorghum grain under low NPK fertilization. J. Agric. Food Chem. 65, 8552–8559 (2017).

  42. 42.

    Gao, X. et al. CuO nanoparticle dissolution and toxicity to wheat (Triticum aestivum) in rhizosphere soil. Environ. Sci. Technol. 52, 2888–2897 (2018).

  43. 43.

    Ashfaq, M., Verma, N. & Khan, S. Carbon nanofibers as a micronutrient carrier in plants: efficient translocation and controlled release of Cu nanoparticles. Environ. Sci. Nano 4, 138–148 (2017).

  44. 44.

    Ghormade, V., Deshpande, M. V. & Paknikar, K. M. Perspectives for nano-biotechnology enabled protection and nutrition of plants. Biotechnol. Adv. 29, 792–803 (2011).

  45. 45.

    Avellan, A. et al. Nanoparticle size and coating chemistry control foliar uptake pathways, translocation and leaf-to-rhizosphere transport in wheat. ACS Nano https://doi.org/10.1021/acsnano.8b09781 (2019).

  46. 46.

    Mastronardi, E., Monreal, C. & Derosa, M. C. Personalized medicine for crops? Opportunities for the application of molecular recognition in agriculture. J. Agric. Food Chem. 66, 6457–6461 (2018).

  47. 47.

    Suriyaraj, S. P. & Selvakumar, R. Advances in nanomaterial based approaches for enhanced fluoride and nitrate removal from contaminated water. RSC Adv. 6, 10565–10583 (2016).

  48. 48.

    Zhang, R., Vivanco, J. M. & Shen, Q. The unseen rhizosphere root–soil–microbe interactions for crop production. Curr. Opin. Microbiol. 37, 8–14 (2017).

  49. 49.

    Simonin, M. et al. Negative effects of copper oxide nanoparticles on carbon and nitrogen cycle microbial activities in contrasting agricultural soils and in presence of plants. Front. Microbiol. 9, 3102 (2018).

  50. 50.

    Asadishad, B., Chahal, S., Cianciarelli, V., Zhou, K. & Tufenkji, N. Effect of gold nanoparticles on extracellular nutrient-cycling enzyme activity and bacterial community in soil slurries: role of nanoparticle size and surface coating. Environ. Sci. Nano 4, 907–918 (2017).

  51. 51.

    Avellan, A. et al. Gold nanoparticle biodissolution by a freshwater macrophyte and its associated microbiome. Nat. Nanotechnol. 13, 1072–1077 (2018).

  52. 52.

    McGivney, E. et al. Biogenic cyanide production promotes dissolution of gold nanoparticles in soil. Environ. Sci. Technol. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.8b05884 (2019).

  53. 53.

    Anderson, A. J., McLean, J. E., Jacobson, A. R. & Britt, D. W. CuO and ZnO nanoparticles modify interkingdom cell signaling processes relevant to crop production. J. Agric. Food Chem. 66, 6513–6524 (2018).

  54. 54.

    Wang, W., Vinocur, B. & Altman, A. Plant responses to drought, salinity and extreme temperatures: Towards genetic engineering for stress tolerance. Planta 218, 1–14 (2003).

  55. 55.

    Savary, S., Ficke, A., Aubertot, J. N. & Hollier, C. Crop losses due to diseases and their implications for global food production losses and food security. Food Secur. 4, 519–537 (2012).

  56. 56.

    Suzuki, N., Rivero, R. M., Shulaev, V., Blumwald, E. & Mittler, R. Abiotic and biotic stress combinations. New Phytol. 203, 32–43 (2014).

  57. 57.

    Kim, J. H., Oh, Y., Yoon, H., Hwang, I. & Chang, Y. S. Iron nanoparticle-induced activation of plasma membrane H+-ATPase promotes stomatal opening in Arabidopsis thaliana. Environ. Sci. Technol. 49, 1113–1119 (2015).

  58. 58.

    Wang, S., Wang, F. & Gao, S. Foliar application with nano-silicon alleviates Cd toxicity in rice seedlings. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 22, 2837–2845 (2015).

  59. 59.

    Oliveira, H. C., Gomes, B. C. R., Pelegrino, M. T. & Seabra, A. B. Nitric oxide-releasing chitosan nanoparticles alleviate the effects of salt stress in maize plants. Nitric Oxide Biol. Chem. 61, 10–19 (2016).

  60. 60.

    Karny, A., Zinger, A., Kajal, A., Shainsky-Roitman, J. & Schroeder, A. Therapeutic nanoparticles penetrate leaves and deliver nutrients to agricultural crops. Sci. Rep. 8, 7589 (2018).

  61. 61.

    Xin, X. et al. Efficiency of biodegradable and pH-responsive polysuccinimide nanoparticles (PSI-NPs) as smart nanodelivery systems in grapefruit: in vitro cellular investigation. Macromol. Biosci. 18, 1800159 (2018).

  62. 62.

    Sabo-Attwood, T. et al. Uptake, distribution and toxicity of gold nanoparticles in tobacco (Nicotiana xanthi) seedlings. Nanotoxicology 6, 353–360 (2012).

  63. 63.

    Czapar, A. E. & Steinmetz, N. F. Plant viruses and bacteriophages for delivery in medicine and biotechnology. Curr. Opin. Chem. Biol. 38, 108–116 (2017).

  64. 64.

    Maruyama, C. R. et al. Nanoparticles based on chitosan as carriers for the combined herbicides Imazapic and Imazapyr. Sci. Rep. 6, 19768 (2016).

  65. 65.

    Prapainop, K. et al. Transferrin-functionalized nanoparticles lose their targeting capabilities when a biomolecule corona adsorbs on the surface. Nat. Nanotechnol. 8, 137–143 (2013).

  66. 66.

    Lombi, E., Donner, E., Dusinska, M. & Wickson, F. A One Health approach to managing the applications and implications of nanotechnologies in agriculture. Nat. Nanotechnol. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41565-019-0460-8 (2019).

  67. 67.

    Arvidsson, R. Risk assessments show engineered nanomaterials to be of low environmental concern. Environ. Sci. Technol. 52, 2436–2437 (2018).

  68. 68.

    Amenta, V. et al. Regulatory aspects of nanotechnology in the agri/feed/food sector in EU and non-EU countries. Regul. Toxicol. Pharmacol. 73, 463–476 (2015).

  69. 69.

    Kah, M., Kookana, R. S., Gogos, A. & Bucheli, T. D. A critical evaluation of nanopesticides and nanofertilizers against their conventional analogues. Nat. Nanotechnol. 13, 677–684 (2018).

  70. 70.

    Falinski, M. M. et al. A framework for sustainable nanomaterial selection and design based on performance, hazard, and economic considerations. Nat. Nanotechnol. 13, 708–714 (2018).

  71. 71.

    Gilbertson, L. M., Zimmerman, J. B., Plata, D. L., Hutchison, J. E. & Anastas, P. T. Designing nanomaterials to maximize performance and minimize undesirable implications guided by the Principles of Green Chemistry. Chem. Soc. Rev. 44, 5758–5777 (2015).

  72. 72.

    Clark, J. H., Farmer, T. J., Herrero-Davila, L. & Sherwood, J. Circular economy design considerations for research and process development in the chemical sciences. Green. Chem. 18, 3914–3934 (2016).

Download references

Acknowledgements

G.V.L. and A.A. thank the US National Science Foundation (NSF) and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) under NSF Cooperative Agreement EF-1266252, the Center for the Environmental Implications of NanoTechnology (CEINT) and the NSF (CBET-1530563; Nano for Agriculturally Relevant Materials (NanoFARM)) for supporting this effort. L.M.G. acknowledges support from the Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation.

Author information

Correspondence to Gregory V. Lowry.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Journal peer review information: Nature Nanotechnology thanks David Britt and Jason White for their contribution to the peer review of this work.

Publisher’s note: Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark
Fig. 1: The green revolution and the new agri-tech revolution.
Fig. 2: Agricultural uses of nanotechnology.
Fig. 3: System trade-offs.