4.8 Review

Nano -enabled improvements of growth and nutritional quality in food plants driven by rhizosphere processes

期刊

ENVIRONMENT INTERNATIONAL
卷 142, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.envint.2020.105831

关键词

Nanomaterials; Meta-analysis; Rhizosphere processes; Biological; Sustainable agriculture

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [41820104009, 41530642, 41807378]
  2. USDA-NIFA Hatch program/UMass CAFE [MAS 00549]
  3. UMass Amherst Conti Faculty Fellowship

向作者/读者索取更多资源

With the rising global population growth and limitation of traditional agricultural technology, global crop production could not provide enough nutrients to assure adequate intake for all people. Nano -fertilizers and nano -pesticides have 20 -30% higher efficacy than conventional products, which offer an effective solution to the above -mentioned problem. Rhizosphere is where plant roots, soil, and soil biota interact, and is the portal of nutrients transporting from soil into plants. The rhizosphere processes could modify the bioavailability of all nutrients and nanomaterials (NMs) before entering the food plants. However, to date, the overall rhizosphere processes regulating the behaviors and bioavailability of NMs to enhance the nutritional quality are still un- certain. In this review, a meta -analysis is conducted to quantitatively assess NMs-mediated changes in nutritional quality from food plants. Furthermore, the current knowledge and related mechanisms of the behavior and bioavailability of NMs driven by rhizosphere processes, e.g., root secretions, microbial and earthworm activities, are summarized. A series of rhizosphere processes can influence how NMs enter plants and change the biological responses, including signal transduction and nutrient absorption and transport. Moreover, future perspectives are presented to maximize the potentials of NMs applications for the enhancement of food crop production and global food security.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据