The growing global population and the phenomenon of climate change are two of the principal concerns of the contemporary world. Every year, the necessity for innovative and eco-friendly technologies to enhance the efficiency of industrial activities increases. The development of materials through nanotechnology has gained attention because of their exceptional physicochemical properties. Indeed, nanomaterials have emerged as innovative tools for improving various industrial processes and products.
For several years, advances in nanotechnology were related to the study of non-biological physicochemical processes. For instance, the synthesis of nanoparticles was one of the most developed topics, as evidenced by the high number of scientific publications [1,2,3]. Firstly, nanoparticles were synthesized through non-biological methods. In other words, organic and inorganic precursors, reducing agents, and stabilizers, often under extreme temperature and pH conditions, were combined in order to produce nanoparticles [4]. Unfortunately, even to this day, stability and toxicity are two of the biggest unsolved problems of chemically synthesized nanoparticles [5].
The necessity to search for eco-friendly alternatives for the chemical synthesis of nanoparticles has led to the exploration of the potential of microorganisms. The first scientific report related to the biological synthesis of nanoparticles was published in 2002. In that year, Kowshik et al. reported the extracellular synthesis of silver nanoparticles using a metal-tolerant yeast strain. This study highlighted the relevance and advantages of the biological synthesis of nanoparticles, for instance, the simplicity of particle separation and the environmentally friendly nature of the process [6].
Nanotechnology, particularly through the synthesis of nanoparticles, has had a positive impact on science and different industries. Currently, solar energy systems, electronic devices, and skin-protecting sunscreens are based on nanotechnology. Despite these advances, the use of nanoparticles in agriculture, whether chemically or biologically synthesized, still has not reached its full potential. A major challenge in modern agriculture is the resistance that fungal phytopathogens have developed in recent years.
In the present review, we analyzed and discussed two interesting nanotechnological alternatives to face fungal disease and resistance in crops. The difference between Nano Fungicide-biofungicides and bio-nanofungicides is discussed in this work.
2. Global Impact of Fungal Diseases in Agriculture
Fungal plant pathogens are the primary cause of plant diseases, leading to substantial crop losses globally. Fungicide resistance is a problem of global concern, exacerbated by the emergence of fungicide-resistant strains that compromise the control of diseases. Despite current treatments, fungal diseases cost pre-harvest crops an estimated 10–23% of crop losses per year. Post-harvest losses add 10–20% more. These pathogens impact a variety of crops such as rice, wheat, maize, and soybean [7]. Resistant fungal phytopathogens provoke serious economic losses to crops every year, estimated at USD 60 billion
/>The severity of fungal diseases may vary each year depending on the environmental conditions, the success of disease control measures, and the development of fungicide-resistant strains. Brazil and the United States are among the major soybean producers globally. In Brazil, for instance, Asian Soybean Rust disease caused by Phakopsora pachyrhizi is the most damaging disease for soybean, with yield losses reaching up to 90% (if not managed properly). The extensive occurrence of this pathogen requires the application of a large amount of Nano Fungicide, increasing production costs and THE environmental impact [9]. In the United States, Frogeye Leaf Spot caused by Cercospora sojina led to significant yield reductions each year. For instance, between 2013 and 2017, in Midwestern states, the estimated losses increased from 460,000 to 7.6 million bushels, indicating a growing threat to soybean growers [
/>3. Fungicide Resistance in Phytopathogenic F
/>The widespread use of synthetic chemical fungicides has driven the evolution of resistant fungal phytopathogens. The resistance to fungicides is an adaptive ability of pathogens to survive and proliferate in the presence of fungicides that were previously effective in controlling them. This phenomenon is a major challenge in agriculture, threatening crop yields and food security [11]. Fungicide resistance mechanisms are well documented in the existing literature [12,13,14]; therefore, this review will not address them furt
/>3.1. Current Fungicides and Strategies to Combat Fungal Disease and Resist
/>Nowadays, farmers use different strategies to manage fungal phytopathogen resistance. The rotation of crops, the use of fungicides with different mechanisms of action, and the optimization of dose to maintain effectiveness and reduce selection pressure are probably the most common strategies. Awarded for the continuous and strong development of fungicide resistance, the agrochemical companies invest in their R&D sector’s to discover the following: 1. fungicides with new mechanisms of action to target resistant pathogens; 2. the effective combination of active ingredients with different mechanisms of action to prevent the easy development of resistance; 3. cocktails of fungicides containing several active ingredients to combat different pathogens simultaneou
/>The most common molecules used by the agrochemical companies for the formulation of fungicides are listed in Table 1 alongside their mechanisms of action. As mentioned above, the combination of active ingredients with different mechanisms of action is a widely adopted strategy to control resistance. For instance, formulations containing 400 g/L of Mefentrifluconazole + Pyraclostrobin or 450 g/L of Bixafen + Prothioconazole + Trifloxystrobin are currently available in the marke
/>If you have any questions regarding where by and also how you can use Nano Fungicide, you can email us on our site.
For several years, advances in nanotechnology were related to the study of non-biological physicochemical processes. For instance, the synthesis of nanoparticles was one of the most developed topics, as evidenced by the high number of scientific publications [1,2,3]. Firstly, nanoparticles were synthesized through non-biological methods. In other words, organic and inorganic precursors, reducing agents, and stabilizers, often under extreme temperature and pH conditions, were combined in order to produce nanoparticles [4]. Unfortunately, even to this day, stability and toxicity are two of the biggest unsolved problems of chemically synthesized nanoparticles [5].
The necessity to search for eco-friendly alternatives for the chemical synthesis of nanoparticles has led to the exploration of the potential of microorganisms. The first scientific report related to the biological synthesis of nanoparticles was published in 2002. In that year, Kowshik et al. reported the extracellular synthesis of silver nanoparticles using a metal-tolerant yeast strain. This study highlighted the relevance and advantages of the biological synthesis of nanoparticles, for instance, the simplicity of particle separation and the environmentally friendly nature of the process [6].
Nanotechnology, particularly through the synthesis of nanoparticles, has had a positive impact on science and different industries. Currently, solar energy systems, electronic devices, and skin-protecting sunscreens are based on nanotechnology. Despite these advances, the use of nanoparticles in agriculture, whether chemically or biologically synthesized, still has not reached its full potential. A major challenge in modern agriculture is the resistance that fungal phytopathogens have developed in recent years.
In the present review, we analyzed and discussed two interesting nanotechnological alternatives to face fungal disease and resistance in crops. The difference between Nano Fungicide-biofungicides and bio-nanofungicides is discussed in this work.
2. Global Impact of Fungal Diseases in Agriculture
Fungal plant pathogens are the primary cause of plant diseases, leading to substantial crop losses globally. Fungicide resistance is a problem of global concern, exacerbated by the emergence of fungicide-resistant strains that compromise the control of diseases. Despite current treatments, fungal diseases cost pre-harvest crops an estimated 10–23% of crop losses per year. Post-harvest losses add 10–20% more. These pathogens impact a variety of crops such as rice, wheat, maize, and soybean [7]. Resistant fungal phytopathogens provoke serious economic losses to crops every year, estimated at USD 60 billion
/>The severity of fungal diseases may vary each year depending on the environmental conditions, the success of disease control measures, and the development of fungicide-resistant strains. Brazil and the United States are among the major soybean producers globally. In Brazil, for instance, Asian Soybean Rust disease caused by Phakopsora pachyrhizi is the most damaging disease for soybean, with yield losses reaching up to 90% (if not managed properly). The extensive occurrence of this pathogen requires the application of a large amount of Nano Fungicide, increasing production costs and THE environmental impact [9]. In the United States, Frogeye Leaf Spot caused by Cercospora sojina led to significant yield reductions each year. For instance, between 2013 and 2017, in Midwestern states, the estimated losses increased from 460,000 to 7.6 million bushels, indicating a growing threat to soybean growers [
/>3. Fungicide Resistance in Phytopathogenic F
/>The widespread use of synthetic chemical fungicides has driven the evolution of resistant fungal phytopathogens. The resistance to fungicides is an adaptive ability of pathogens to survive and proliferate in the presence of fungicides that were previously effective in controlling them. This phenomenon is a major challenge in agriculture, threatening crop yields and food security [11]. Fungicide resistance mechanisms are well documented in the existing literature [12,13,14]; therefore, this review will not address them furt
/>3.1. Current Fungicides and Strategies to Combat Fungal Disease and Resist
/>Nowadays, farmers use different strategies to manage fungal phytopathogen resistance. The rotation of crops, the use of fungicides with different mechanisms of action, and the optimization of dose to maintain effectiveness and reduce selection pressure are probably the most common strategies. Awarded for the continuous and strong development of fungicide resistance, the agrochemical companies invest in their R&D sector’s to discover the following: 1. fungicides with new mechanisms of action to target resistant pathogens; 2. the effective combination of active ingredients with different mechanisms of action to prevent the easy development of resistance; 3. cocktails of fungicides containing several active ingredients to combat different pathogens simultaneou
/>The most common molecules used by the agrochemical companies for the formulation of fungicides are listed in Table 1 alongside their mechanisms of action. As mentioned above, the combination of active ingredients with different mechanisms of action is a widely adopted strategy to control resistance. For instance, formulations containing 400 g/L of Mefentrifluconazole + Pyraclostrobin or 450 g/L of Bixafen + Prothioconazole + Trifloxystrobin are currently available in the marke
/>If you have any questions regarding where by and also how you can use Nano Fungicide, you can email us on our site.
