Skip to main content
Download PDF
Download ePub

Copper oxide-based nanoparticles in agro-nanotechnology: advances and applications for sustainable farming

Agriculture & Food Security volume 14, Article number: 7 (2025) Cite this article

Abstract

Feeding the world's population sustainably and addressing food insecurity are among the most pressing global challenges. Agriculture, a key sector in addressing these challenges, faces disease outbreaks, inefficient fertilizer use, and adverse environmental impacts. This review explores the green synthesis and sustainable application of copper oxide nanoparticles (CuO NPs) in agriculture, focusing on their role as nanoagrochemicals. The green synthesis of CuO NPs using plant extracts produces nanoparticles (NPs) with tailored properties that enhance their efficacy as nanoagrochemicals. Copper oxide NPs have shown promising applications as nanopesticides, providing potent antimicrobial and antifungal effects, primarily through reactive oxygen species (ROS) generation, which disrupts cellular functions in pathogens. Moreover, CuO NPs improve plant growth by enhancing nutrient uptake and photosynthetic efficiency, making them effective nanofertilizers. Furthermore, nanopriming, an innovative seed treatment using CuO NPs, enhances seed germination and plant growth by activating stress-related genes and improving biochemical responses, especially under drought and salinity. Studies demonstrate the superior efficacy of CuO NPs over conventional agrochemicals in enhancing seedling vigor, nutrient uptake, and crop yield. However, concern regarding phytotoxicity at higher concentrations and potential environmental impacts necessitate careful dosage optimization. This review provides insights into the sustainable application of CuO NPs in agriculture, highlighting their potential to revolutionize crop productivity while emphasizing the need for further research into long-term environmental safety and optimized application methods.

Introduction

Safely and sustainably feeding the rapidly growing global population is a formidable challenge of our time. According to the United Nations, the global population is projected to reach approximately 8.5 billion by 2030, necessitating a 50% increase in food production to meet the escalating demand [1]. Agriculture is critical for the economies of many countries, including Afghanistan, where it contributes 23% of the GDP and employs 61.6% of the labor force, given that 70% of the population in rural areas live in poverty, enhancing agricultural productivity and implementing effective agronomic measures are essential for ensuring food security and economic stability globally [2]. Traditional agricultural methods face numerous challenges, such as inefficient fertilizer application, which leads to environmental pollution [3], and diseases caused by bacteria, fungi, pests, and viruses, which reduce crop quality and yield [4]. Nanotechnology offers promising solutions to address food security challenges, particularly through its applications in improving nutrient delivery, and crop resilience. These advancements hold significant potential for resource-constrained regions, where ensuring sustainable agriculture is critical to achieving long-term food security [5]. One key advantage of nanotechnology lies in its ability to enhance nutrient uptake and delivery through nanofertilizers (fertilizers that utilize NPs), which improve the solubility and absorption of essential nutrients, reducing environmental impact and enhancing productivity [6]. For instance, CuO NPs improve micronutrients such as P, K, Mg and Ca in Medicago polymorpha L. [7]. In addition, nanotechnology provides innovative approaches to pest control, targeting pests more precisely and effectively, mitigating pesticide resistance and reducing chemical load on the environment [5, 7]. Copper oxide NPs were found to be over ten times more efficient than conventional CuSO4 in antimicrobial performance while also reducing environmental impacts such as renewable energy use (64.7%), human health risks (69.6%), and ecosystem quality degradation (53.2%) [9]. Furthermore, nanotechnology addresses water scarcity by using nanofiltration techniques, such as graphene-based filters, to remove contaminants from irrigation water, improving water quality and ensuring efficient crop growth [5, 7]. Despite these advancements, the widespread adoption of agricultural nanotechnology faces several challenges, including market development, regulatory hurdles, and potential health and environmental risks associated with NPs use [10]. Regulatory frameworks are especially crucial for enabling the safe and equitable application of CuO NPs, ensuring their benefits reach smallholder farmers while minimizing environmental risks. Moreover, geographical disparities and regulatory barriers in emerging economies further complicate the deployment of nanoagrochemicals, although the potential for improving food security and climate resilience remains significant [7, 9].

Copper oxide NPs can be engineered to release nutrients in a controlled manner, ensuring plants receive a steady supply of essential elements while minimizing excess fertilizer use and environmental pollution [11]. Their nano-size allows deeper penetration into plant tissues, increasing nutrient uptake and lowering the fertilizer requirement [12]. In pest management, CuO NPs formulated as nanopesticides offer a sustainable solution to growing pest resistance, enhancing the delivery of active ingredients to target organisms and controlling plant diseases caused by bacteria and fungi due to their antimicrobial properties [12, 13]. Nanopriming with CuO NPs enhances plant resilience by triggering stress-response pathways, improving seed germination, root development, and overall plant tolerance to environmental stresses such as drought and salinity [14, 15]. The integration of CuO NPs into agricultural practices has the potential to significantly contribute to global food security efforts. Their applications in nanofertilizers and nanopesticides can reduce resource dependence and environmental impact, while nanopriming enhances crop resilience to climate change [12, 13]. However, addressing potential regulatory and safety challenges is vital to their widespread adoption, particularly in regions facing severe food insecurity. Furthermore, the use of NPs, including CuO NPs as nanofertilizers and nanopesticides, could contribute to reducing greenhouse gas emissions by decreasing the need for large-scale agrochemical applications, addressing both agricultural productivity and climate change challenges [17]. This highlights the importance of CuO NPs in developing sustainable agricultural practices, though more research is needed to fully understand their synthesis, application, and long-term environmental impact.

The focus of this review encompasses two critical areas related to CuO NPs in agriculture: green synthesis and application. Green synthesis emphasizes the importance of developing environmentally friendly methods for producing CuO NPs, moving away from conventional chemical and physical synthesis that poses significant environmental risks. The application aspect evaluates the effectiveness of CuO NPs as nanofertilizers, nanopesticides and nanopriming agents, aiming to optimize nutrient delivery and enhance pest control while minimizing environmental contamination. Together, these focus areas aim to provide a comprehensive understanding of CuO NPs and their role in promoting sustainable agriculture.

Method

In this review, a comprehensive literature search was conducted to gather and analyze relevant studies on the green synthesis and applications of CuO NPs in agriculture, specifically as nanoagrochemicals. The primary focus was on three key areas: the use of CuO NPs as nanopesticides, nanofertilizers, and their role as nanopriming agents. To identify the most relevant studies, a systematic search was performed across multiple scientific databases, including Web of Science, Scopus, PubMed, and Google Scholar. The search was limited to peer-reviewed articles published in English, and no specific time restriction was applied to capture both early foundational work and recent advancements in the field. The following keywords and their combinations were used during the search: nanoagrochemicals, CuO nanoparticles, green synthesis, nanopesticide, nanofertilizer, and nanopriming. The search results were screened based on titles and abstracts to ensure relevance to the subject of CuO NPs in agriculture. Studies that focused on other types of NPs or non-agricultural applications were excluded. Full texts of the selected articles were reviewed, and relevant data on the synthesis, mechanisms of action, and impacts of CuO NPs as nanopesticides, nanofertilizers, and nanopriming agents were extracted. Key information on the efficacy, toxicity, and potential for sustainable agriculture was also considered.

Properties and synthesis of copper oxide nanoparticles

Copper oxide NPs possess unique physicochemical properties, making them highly valuable for various applications. Their vast surface area, robust adsorption capabilities, and numerous reactive sites contribute to their high catalytic activity and chemical stability [18]. Additionally, CuO NPs are known for their antimicrobial and fungicidal properties, which enhance their potential in agricultural applications [18, 19]. These properties are mainly due to their surface-free electrons, specific surface area, and distinct surface activity [21], which allow them to interact efficiently with target organisms or environmental factors. These properties directly address agricultural challenges, such as improving crop yields, reducing post-harvest losses, and preventing crop diseases, which are essential to ensuring global food and nutritional security.

Copper oxide NPs are synthesized through various chemical and physical methods, each with advantages and limitations [22]. The sol–gel method is a popular chemical technique synthesizing CuO NPs with tunable specific surface areas. For example, Dörner et al. [23] synthesized CuO NPs with sizes ranging from 20–40 nm, where the size was dependent on pH levels, demonstrating the method's flexibility in controlling NPs characteristics. Other chemical methods, such as precipitation and hydrothermal techniques, have also been used to synthesize CuO NPs [23] efficiently. However, these methods often require precise conditions, such as high temperatures and pressures, limiting their scalability and environmental sustainability [24].

Despite the effectiveness of traditional chemical and physical methods for CuO NP synthesis, they present several drawbacks. Chemical synthesis often involves toxic reducing agents, such as hydrazine and borohydride, which pose significant health and environmental risks [25]. Additionally, physical methods require sophisticated equipment, high temperatures, and energy-intensive processes. The potential contamination of NPs with hazardous materials and the environmental footprint of these methods have led researchers to seek safer, more sustainable alternatives [26]. These limitations not only raise health and environmental concerns, but also undermine the goal of achieving sustainable agricultural systems that align with global food security and environmental preservation goals.

Green synthesis aligns with the principles of sustainable agriculture by minimizing environmental pollution, reducing the use of hazardous chemicals, and ensuring safer NPs applications in food systems, thereby supporting long-term food security goals [27]. This approach utilizes biological resources, such as plant extracts, as reducing and stabilizing agents, eliminating the need for toxic chemicals [28,29,30]. Plant extracts are rich in phytochemicals, secondary metabolites, and natural compounds that facilitate the reduction and stabilization of CuO NPs [19]. For instance, Sing et al. [31] used Morus alba leaf extract to synthesize spherical CuO NPs with diameters ranging from 40 to 50 nm. Other examples include Vigna radiata and Azadirachta indica, which produced CuO NPs of 24 nm and 50 nm, respectively [14, 25]. The variation in particle sizes based on plant species demonstrates the flexibility of green synthesis in producing NPs with specific properties tailored for agricultural use. The details of the plant species used for synthesizing CuO NPs are further described in Table 1. Green-synthesized CuO NPs have shown promising applications in agriculture, particularly as antimicrobial agents and nanopesticides. These NPs can inhibit microbial growth by disrupting metabolic activities, making them suitable for organic pest control in phytopathology [32]. However, while green synthesis is a safer approach, evaluating the environmental impact and safety of CuO NPs, especially regarding their accumulation in soil and water systems, is crucial. Addressing these concerns ensures the sustainable use of nanotechnology in agriculture while safeguarding food systems against unintended consequences, such as soil degradation or water contamination, which could exacerbate food insecurity in vulnerable regions.

Table 1 Green synthesis of CuO NPs from different plant species
Full size table

Copper oxide-based nanopesticides

Crop diseases are among the factors that threaten food security worldwide. Plant pathogens reduce global agricultural productivity by 20%, resulting in billions of annual losses [33]. These productivity losses exacerbate food insecurity, particularly in regions already facing challenges such as limited agricultural resources and growing population demands. Crop diseases caused by pathogens such as insects, viruses, bacteria, fungi, and nematodes decrease yield and compromise quality and shelf life [22]. For instance, to date, fungal diseases account for approximately 70–80% of crop diseases, significantly reducing agricultural production and even causing disastrous reductions in yields and negative economic impacts [34]. Although various alternative control strategies have been applied for protective control, including the use of conventional fungicides and the improvement of cultivation measures [35], the development of pathogenic fungal resistance and adverse effects caused by environmental exposure to fungicides are emerging threats that have become great challenges to agricultural production [36]. Therefore, under these circumstances, more effective and amicable disease management strategies are urgently needed to meet the criteria for sustainable agriculture. To overcome these problems associated with conventional pesticides, recent trends in pest management have moved toward the development of nanotechnology-assisted formulations, which include nanoformulations of pesticides (nanotechnology-enhanced pesticide delivery systems) and nanopesticides, which have the potential to offer increasing benefits and fewer side effects [37]. Nanopesticides align with sustainable agriculture goals by minimizing the environmental footprint of pesticide use, reducing chemical runoff into water systems, and improving resource efficiency, which supports long-term agricultural resilience. Nanopesticides formulations improve the features and behaviour of pesticides, such as their stability, mobility, dispersion, solubility, and targeted delivery [38]. Moreover, it can also improve the safety, efficacy, and cost-effectiveness of traditional pesticides by extending the effect duration, increasing the efficiency, reducing the dose and controlling the release of the active ingredients, and improving the stability of payloads from the environment, which subsequently reduces the amount of environmental residue [39].

Copper oxide NPs have demonstrated fungicidal and insecticidal properties, making them suitable for use as nanopesticides [40]. Studies have shown that compared with conventional pesticides, CuO NPs are more effective at pest control [13]. For instance, the green synthesis of CuO NPs via foliar spraying of green tea in lettuce pot experiments has shown promising results. Foliar spray increased antioxidant activity without negatively impacting the lettuce defense system, unlike soil irrigation or CuSO4 treatment [14]. This demonstrates the potential of CuO NPs to provide sustainable pest control solutions while maintaining crop health and quality, which is vital for meeting global food security demands. Integrating CuO NPs and ε-PL into a nanogel has enhanced antifungal activity, improving disease control in tobacco plants infected with Alternaria alternata [20]. The nanogel outperformed the commercial fungicide CuCaSO4 at lower Cu concentrations. CuONP@ALGNP@PL also effectively inhibited A. alternata spores. Additionally, it showed greater safety than CuCaSO4 at the same Cu concentration [20]. The effectiveness of CuO NPs in controlling tobacco black shank (TBS) disease caused by Phytophthora nicotianae was investigated by Juan-ni et al. [21]. In this study, CuO NPs effectively suppressed the reproductive growth of the fungus by inhibiting hyphal growth, spore germination, and sporangium production through morphological damage, ROS accumulation, and increased superoxide dismutase (SOD) activity. While in pot experiments, a 100 mg/L concentration of CuO NPs reduced TBS development by 33.69% without harming plants, activated defense enzymes and resistance genes in tobacco, and significantly increased Cu content in both leaves and roots, especially in infected roots. These outcomes not only demonstrate the capacity of CuO NPs to enhance disease resistance, but also underscore their role in boosting crop productivity, which is critical for strengthening food supply chains in a changing climate. Furthermore, cost-effective and environmentally friendly CuO NPs were synthesized and exhibited antifungal activity against Ziziphus jujuba in a study by Manzoor et al. [25]. Biologically synthesized CuO NPs were applied as antifungal agents against Fusarium virguliforme in soybean plants through foliar treatments, resulting in increased plant growth, improved nutrient content, enhanced photosynthetic indicators, and elevated expression of genes linked to antifungal defense, thereby demonstrating their capacity to boost disease resistance [22].

Copper oxide NPs exhibit significant potential as nanopesticides due to their diverse modes of action against pathogens and their benefits to plant health. Copper oxide NPs exert potent antimicrobial and antifungal effects primarily through the generation of ROS, which disrupt cellular functions by damaging cell walls, membranes, and DNA, ultimately leading to cell death [41]. For instance, biosynthesized CuO NPs showed a concentration-dependent inhibition of E. coli, with a maximum inhibition zone observed at 100 mg/L (11 ± 0.1 mm), and substantial mycelial growth inhibition in Rhizopus oryzae inoculated Jujube fruits attributed to ROS production and DNA degradation [25]. Composite nanogels like CuONP@ALGNP@PL further enhance antifungal activity against pathogens such as Botrytis cinerea and Fusarium graminearum, outperforming conventional fungicides by leveraging Cu2+ release and nanogel interactions to destabilize pathogen membranes [20]. Additionally, CuO NPs disrupt cellular functions in fungi by damaging cell walls and membranes, leading to cell death, which is particularly effective against various plant pathogenic fungi, including species of Fusarium [20]. Beyond their direct antimicrobial properties, CuO NPs enhance plant resistance to pathogens and improve crop yield by modifying root morphology and promoting beneficial microbial activity in the soil [3]. This dual role of CuO NPs as both nanopesticides and growth enhancers makes them a valuable tool in integrated pest management, offering an environmentally friendly alternative to conventional pesticides with reduced phytotoxicity and improved plant health [20]. However, to maximize their benefits and minimize risks, the adoption of CuO NPs requires robust regulatory frameworks and long-term environmental impact studies to ensure their safe use in diverse agricultural systems. These measures will help balance productivity gains with environmental preservation, particularly in regions highly dependent on agriculture for food security. The use of CuO NPs as nanopesticides against different pathogens is summarized in Table 2.

Table 2 Application of CuO NPs as nanopesticides
Full size table

Copper oxide-based nanofertilizers

Chemical-based fertilizers, while widely used, often result in significant nutrient losses, with studies indicating that 40–70% of nitrogen, 50–70% of potassium, 80–90% of phosphorus, and approximately 95% of micronutrients such as zinc, iron, copper, and molybdenum are lost to the environment through processes such as leaching, runoff, and soil erosion [44]. These inefficiencies are not only unsustainable but also detrimental to ecosystems, as nutrient leaching contributes to eutrophication and soil degradation, severely impacting agricultural landscapes. Despite the potential of chemical-based fertilizers to enhance crop growth, they have not substantially increased plant nutrient uptake or crop productivity in current agricultural practices, raising concerns about their sustainability [45]. This inefficacy is compounded by the fact that overuse of chemical-based fertilizers can lead to diminished soil health and decreased profitability for farmers, ultimately undermining agricultural sustainability and prompting a shift towards more sustainable practices like organic and precision farming. The advent of eco-friendly nanofertilizers offers a promising alternative, addressing traditional fertilizers' environmental and efficacy limitations. Nanofertilizers, often referred to as "smart fertilizers", improve nutrient use efficiency by enhancing the availability of essential nutrients to plants while minimizing environmental impacts [46]. For example, their nano-size increases the surface area, which can significantly improve the absorption efficiency of nutrients compared to conventional fertilizers [44]. This enhanced efficiency is not merely theoretical; practical applications have shown that nanofertilizers can increase plant nutrient uptake through foliar and soil application methods, thus improving plant growth and yield [47, 48].

The use of CuO NPs in agriculture has shown promising results in enhancing plant growth, antioxidant activity, and overall plant health. However, the findings across different studies vary, highlighting both the potential benefits and challenges associated with their application. For instance, a study found that the presence of 50 mg/L CuO NPs at 15 °C significantly enhanced the root (by 37%) and shoot (by 13%) growth of Vigna radiata [24]. Similarly, the growth metrics of Triticum aestivum (wheat) improved markedly due to the enhanced nutrient uptake facilitated by CuO NPs [49]. In another study, the growth of Lepidium sativum, Raphanus sativus, and Zea mays was significantly improved at specific CuO NP concentrations [50]. However, these findings contrast with studies highlighting the potential phytotoxic effects of CuO NPs at higher concentrations. For instance, while lower concentrations of CuO NPs promoted wheat growth, higher concentrations inhibited root and shoot growth, indicating a toxicity threshold [51]. Similarly, the study involving Lactuca sativa found that while CuO-Indole-3-acetic acid nanocomposites (CuO-IAA NPs) reduced the toxic effects of CuO NPs, high concentrations of uncapped CuO NPs still led to reduced biomass and shoot length [52]. In contrast, another study on soybeans revealed that while foliar application of CuO NPs and citric acid-coated CuO NPs (CuO-CA NPs) significantly increased soybean yield, ionic Cu showed no impact on yield, suggesting that the method of application and NPs coating play crucial roles in determining efficacy [49]. Moreover, the effect of CuO NPs on different plant species and under various environmental conditions can vary significantly. For example, Nekoukhou et al. [53] reported that Dracocephalum moldavica L. treated with CuO NPs exhibited higher bioaccumulation of shoot copper, flavonoids, and anthocyanins compared to chelated-Cu treatments, leading to greater shoot biomass and secondary metabolite yield. These results contrast with findings from another study where excessive CuO NP concentrations were shown to inhibit growth and chlorophyll content in wheat (Triticum aestivum) due to toxicity effects [49]. This discrepancy indicates that while CuO NPs can enhance plant growth and secondary metabolite production, their effectiveness is highly dependent on concentration, plant species, NPs surface properties, and application methods, necessitating careful dosage optimization and a tailored approach based on crop and environmental conditions to prevent adverse effects.

The mechanisms through which CuO NPs exert their effects include activating antioxidant defense systems, improving photosynthetic efficiency, and enhancing nutrient uptake. Increased antioxidant activity in plants treated with CuO NPs is a consistent finding in the literature. For example, CuO NPs increased antioxidant concentration by 81% in cowpea cultivars, suggesting a robust activation of the plant's defense mechanisms against oxidative stress [54]. This is consistent with findings in wheat, where CuO NPs enhanced the activity of key antioxidant enzymes, thereby mitigating oxidative damage caused by cadmium stress [49]. Contrastingly, a study involving CuO-IAA NPs found that while CuO NPs alone increased the levels of non-enzymatic antioxidants such as phenolic and flavonoids, the presence of IAA reduced these levels, suggesting a complex interplay between CuO NPs and hormonal regulation [52]. This indicates that while CuO NPs can enhance antioxidant activity, their interaction with other compounds like IAA can modulate these effects, potentially reducing the overall antioxidative response. Nevertheless, increased chlorophyll content and enhanced photosynthetic efficiency are commonly reported benefits of CuO NP application. For instance, using CuO nanofertilizers resulted in a 73% increase in chlorophyll content for soil application, attributed to the NPs' ability to improve light absorption and photosynthetic processes [54]. Similarly, in a study on Nicotiana tabacum, applying PGR-ILs combined with CuO NPs improved net photosynthetic rates and biomass yield, suggesting enhanced photosynthetic efficiency [55]. On the other hand, higher concentrations of CuO NPs were found to inhibit photosynthetic activity, as indicated by reduced chlorophyll content and growth inhibition in wheat at concentrations above 0.1 mg/L [51]. The improvement in nutrient uptake is another widely recognized benefit of CuO NP application. Studies have shown that CuO NPs enhance the absorption of essential nutrients like copper and zinc, promoting plant health and growth [25, 46]. For example, biogenic CuO and ZnO NPs increased the total copper and zinc content in both roots and shoots of Amaranthus hybridus, without causing toxic accumulation, which contrasts with the harmful effects of traditional copper and zinc salts at equivalent concentrations [57]. However, excessive application of CuO NPs can lead to soil toxicity, as highlighted in a study where high concentrations of CuO NPs resulted in reduced root and shoot growth in wheat due to elevated copper ion release [51]. Table 3 summarizes the application of CuO as a nanofertilizer to different plant species.

Table 3 Application of copper oxide NPs as a nanofertilizer
Full size table

Nanopriming

Nanopriming, an innovative seed treatment approach, leverages the unique properties of NPs to improve crop productivity and resilience under stress conditions, offering significant advantages over traditional priming techniques. Conventional methods, such as hydropriming and osmopriming, focus on osmotic regulation and hydration, helping seeds initiate metabolic processes for early seedling development [48, 54]. However, these techniques often fail to fully address modern agricultural challenges, particularly under environmental stress conditions like drought and salinity [54]. In contrast, nanopriming uses NPs with small size, high surface area, and enhanced reactivity to penetrate the seed coat and interact with cellular components, thereby accelerating metabolic processes, modulating physiological responses, and activating stress-related genes [14, 55, 56]. Nanopriming directly contributes to addressing global food security challenges by enabling crops to withstand environmental stresses and improving productivity. This makes it a valuable tool for achieving sustainable agricultural practices that align with the principles of resource efficiency and climate resilience. Recent nanotechnological advancements have further enhanced the scalability and cost-effectiveness of nanopriming in agriculture. Room-temperature, energy-efficient assembly-based approaches significantly reduce costs by minimizing reliance on expensive equipment and reducing waste through selective material addition [63]. In developing countries, where food insecurity remains a pressing issue, the economic viability of nanopriming can play a transformative role by increasing crop yields without requiring extensive input costs. These innovations make nanopriming a more economically viable option for large-scale agricultural applications [64]. This novel approach holds significant potential for modern agriculture, as NPs can penetrate seed coats and interact with cellular components, triggering accelerated metabolic processes [15]. Nanopriming has shown promise in improving germination rates, seedling vigor, and stress tolerance by activating stress-related genes and enhancing biochemical responses within seeds [16]. Compared to traditional methods, nanopriming reduces germination time and modulates physiological and biochemical processes, offering a more robust solution for addressing the growing challenges of crop productivity under environmental stresses [62]. While conventional priming focuses on osmotic regulation and hydration, nanopriming offers a more dynamic and tailored approach by incorporating advanced materials like metal-based or biopolymer NPs, which can activate plant defense mechanisms more effectively [44]. Consequently, the growing interest in nanopriming reflects its potential to revolutionize seed treatment by increasing agricultural sustainability and productivity.

In nanopriming, various NPs such as copper, iron, gold-based, silver, carbon, zinc, titanium dioxide, and fullerenes are used as seed priming agents, with the nanoformulations being retained by the seed coat; these NPs are categorized into two groups: active NPs (active NPs are engineered with specific properties that affect biological processes [16] and sustained release nanocarrier systems (sustained release nanocarrier systems use NPs to gradually deliver active substances like nutrients, pesticides, or growth regulators over time) [65]. Active NPs typically consist of metal-based NPs, such as zinc, manganese, and iron NPs, with a size of approximately 100 nm. Sustained release nanocarrier systems involve NPs, which can be either active or inactive, loaded with active compounds such as fungicides, herbicides, nutrients, or plant growth regulators that are slowly released into the plant; biopolymer NPs, like chitosan, are commonly used in this system for seed priming, as demonstrated by improved seedling growth in maize seeds primed with chitosan NPs [44]. Nanopriming offers a novel approach to enhance seed germination and seedling vigor, especially under stress conditions, by applying NPs to seeds before sowing [25, 55,56,57]. This method significantly improves over traditional priming techniques, such as hydropriming, by using the unique properties of NPs, including their small size, high surface area, and reactivity, to penetrate the seed coat and interact with cellular components [35, 55]. Conventional seed priming initiates metabolic processes through hydration, but nanopriming enhances physiological and biochemical responses, particularly under drought and salinity [25, 54, 55]. For example, the application of CuO and silver NPs (AgNPs) as nanopriming agents, has been shown to stimulate early metabolic changes and activate stress-related genes, resulting in better germination rates and increased seedling vigor [56, 63]. Faraz et al. [68] examined using CuO NPs as seed primers. After priming, the Brassica juncea seeds were planted in pots and allowed to grow naturally. Priming the seeds with 4 mg/L CuO NPs for 30 min yielded the best results among the different concentrations tested. This treatment significantly increased shoot length (by 30%), root length (by 27%), net photosynthetic rate (by 30%), internal CO2 concentration (by 28%), and the proline content (by 41%). Additionally, the application of CuO NPs also led to a significant increase in the activity of antioxidant enzymes (such as superoxide dismutase, catalase, and peroxidase) and biochemical parameters (such as nitrate reductase and carbonic anhydrase) in Brassica juncea plants. While CuO NPS is widely reported to enhance water uptake and seed germination, leading to a germination rate of 93.33% compared to 76.67% in control groups [15], ZnO NPs have explicitly been noted for their role in enhancing seedling vigor by activating antioxidant enzymes like SOD and CAT, which mitigate oxidative stress [62, 64]. This is a notable advantage over traditional priming methods, which do not directly activate such stress-response pathways at the molecular level [25, 54]. Moreover, nanopriming with biopolymer NPs like chitosan shows promise in sustainable agriculture, as these biodegradable NPs promote seedling growth while minimizing environmental contamination through gradual nutrient release [44]. The potential of nanopriming to enhance crop productivity is further demonstrated by the improved shoot length, dry weight, and photosynthetic activity seen in plants treated with NPs. For example, CuO NPs applied at 4 mg/L resulted in a 30% increase in shoot length and photosynthetic rate, underscoring the capability of nanopriming to boost plant growth metrics under stress conditions [68]. In another study, the seed imbibition and germination coefficients in response to increasing concentrations of CuO and CuO@APTES NPs showed that absorption potential increased with concentration, saturating at 48 ppm for CuO and 80 ppm for CuO@APTES, which likely activated enzymes and accelerated metabolic processes, resulting in improved germination rates of 88.3% and 93.33% compared to 76.67% in the control [15]. These improvements contrast with the limited scope of traditional priming methods, which often do not sustain such benefits beyond early seedling stages [25, 54].

Despite its benefits, nanopriming presents challenges, particularly concerning the concentration of NPs. Higher doses of NPs, such as CuO NPs, can induce phytotoxic effects, inhibiting seed germination and root growth [61, 66]. This concentration-dependent response is crucial, as low concentrations stimulate growth, but excessive NPs accumulation can lead to toxic effects, such as reduced root elongation and delayed flowering [61].In addition, the environmental impact of NPs must be considered. Studies indicate that the accumulation of NPs in soil and water ecosystems can disrupt soil microbiota, affecting soil fertility and plant health [57, 58]. Nanoparticles, especially metal-based, may also persist in the environment due to their slow degradation, posing long-term risks to non-target organisms, including beneficial insects and pollinators [58].

Environmental fate and behavior of copper oxide nanoparticles

The environmental fate and behavior of CuO NPs are important due to their increasing application in agriculture and other fields. Various key factors, including synthesis methods, particle size, morphology, chemical composition, and environmental conditions, influence CuO NPs' environmental behavior.

The synthesis method of CuO NPs plays a critical role in determining their environmental behavior, with green synthesis methods being less toxic and more eco-friendly than traditional chemical approaches [66, 67]. Studies show that plant extracts enhance the stability and environmental compatibility of CuO NPs, with examples like Bergenia ciliata rhizome extract demonstrating improved stability [67, 68]. This suggests that green synthesis may yield more favorable environmental profiles. The stability of green-synthesized CuO NPs also highlights their potential in antimicrobial treatments and photocatalysis, contrasting them with traditional organic agents. Still, concerns about long-term accumulation and ecological impacts remain insufficiently explored [76]. Furthermore, the superior colloidal stability and lower toxicity of green-synthesized CuO NPs compared to chemically synthesized ones emphasize the importance of synthesis methods in determining environmental behavior [77]. However, long-term accumulation in soils and the potential for unintended ecological impacts remain concerns that need further study.

The size and shape of CuO NPs play a significant role in their biodegradation rates and environmental behavior, with smaller nanoparticles (4–10 nm in diameter) exhibiting higher surface areas and enhanced reactivity, thereby facilitating their interaction with pollutants and biological systems [71, 72]. For example, hierarchical nanorods (50–200 nm) demonstrate effective adsorption capabilities for hazardous substances like dichromate, illustrating the critical role morphology plays in environmental applications [72, 73]. The porous, sponge-like structure of CuO NPs further enhances their photocatalytic degradation of organic dyes, increasing their efficiency [71, 74]. The higher surface area-to-volume ratio of smaller NPs is correlated with increased reactivity, as confirmed by various studies, although the optimal size range may vary based on environmental conditions [66, 75]. Additionally, rod-like versus spherical morphologies affect dispersion and pollutant interaction, though further empirical comparisons in real-world contexts would help clarify these observations [75].

Environmental conditions such as pH, organic matter, and ionic strength play a significant role in the stability of CuO NPs [78]. Studies indicate that at higher pH levels (around 8–10), CuO NPs exhibit enhanced photocatalytic activity, achieving up to 98.33% degradation of malachite green dye [79]. Conversely, lower pH conditions lead to the formation of CuO complexes and reduced photocatalytic efficiency [80]. Additionally, pH impacts the stability and removal efficiency of CuO NPs during coagulation processes, with optimal removal (up to 90%) occurring at neutral pH [81]. Overall, pH is a critical factor in determining the functionality and environmental fate of CuO NPs in aquatic systems [82]. The presence of natural organic matter (NOM) also modifies the agglomeration and dissolution rates of CuO NPs, with varying effects based on pH [83]. Natural organic matter enhances the stability and retention of CuO NPs in soils by promoting hetero-aggregation with clay colloids, which reduces their aggregation and sedimentation rates [10, 84]. Additionally, the presence of NOM can alter the dissolution rates of CuO NPs, with DHA facilitating increased copper release through complexation, thereby affecting their ecotoxicity [85]. Studies indicate that the interaction between CuO NPs and NOM leads to a more stable colloidal form, which can mitigate the generation of reactive oxygen species and reduce cytotoxicity [86]. Overall, organic matter significantly modulates the environmental dynamics of CuO NPs, influencing their toxicity and accumulation in aquatic and soil ecosystems [87]. Ionic strength (IS) significantly influences the environmental behavior of CuO NPs, affecting their stability, aggregation, and transport in various ecosystems. Studies indicate that higher IS leads to increased aggregation of CuO NPs, which can hinder their mobility in soil and aquatic environments [10, 81]. For instance, in low-IS conditions, CuO NPs form smaller aggregates, enhancing copper bioaccumulation in organisms like zebrafish embryos, while high IS promotes larger aggregates that are less bioavailable [89]. Additionally, the presence of clay colloids and organic matter can alter the critical coagulation concentration, further impacting retention and transport dynamics [10, 83].

Regulatory challenges and future perspective

The regulatory challenges surrounding the application of CuO NPs are diverse and comprehensive, reflecting the need for standardized guidelines and a deeper understanding of their potential risks. Key concerns include the lack of comprehensive biocompatibility assessments and the need for robust toxicity testing to ensure safe use across various fields, including agriculture [84, 85]. Despite their promising antimicrobial, antifungal, and agricultural applications, CuO NPs pose risks due to their potential cytotoxicity and genotoxicity, which are influenced by NPs' shape and concentration. Current regulatory frameworks often fail to adequately address these unique risks, relying on outdated policies that do not account for the distinctive physical properties of NPs like CuO NPs, necessitating updated legislation tailored to nanotechnology [93]. One of the central challenges is the need for standardized testing systems and reference materials, which are critical for accurate risk assessment and ensuring the safe integration of CuO NPs into industrial and agricultural practices. Regulatory oversight is notably lacking in agriculture, where the potential phytotoxic effects of CuO NPs, such as reduced growth and stress induction in plants, raise concerns about their long-term environmental impact and accumulation in ecosystems [87, 88].Studies indicate that exposure to CuO NPs can lead to a reduction in microbial diversity and enzymatic activities essential for soil health, such as dehydrogenase and urease activities, with reductions observed between 20 and 95% depending on the treatment and dosage [96, 97]. Furthermore, the presence of CuO NPs alters the composition of microbial communities, favoring certain taxa like Acidobacteria while suppressing others, which can disrupt biogeochemical cycles crucial for ecosystem stability [96, 98]. Future research must optimize CuO NP application methods and explore the interactions between these NPs and other agrochemicals to fully understand their effects on plant physiology and crop productivity. Additionally, there is a growing need for an authoritative regulatory framework to manage the safe deployment of CuO NPs. This includes adapting current legislation to address the limitations of traditional risk assessment methods, as NPs require a more refined approach due to their complex interactions with biological systems and the environment [99]. A new regulatory paradigm is essential for aligning nanotechnology advancements with safety and sustainability goals, particularly as CuO NPs become more integrated into agricultural applications.

Conclusion

Copper oxide NPs present a transformative opportunity for modern agriculture, offering enhanced productivity through their unique antimicrobial and fungicidal properties and their potential to improve nutrient uptake and resilience under stress conditions. The innovative use of green synthesis methods further underscores the promise of CuO NPs as safer, more sustainable alternatives to conventional agrochemicals. However, adopting CuO NPs in agricultural practices must be cautiously approached, given the potential risks associated with their use. The toxicity of CuO NPs to non-target organisms raises significant ecological concerns, particularly regarding environmental persistence and potential human health hazards. Comprehensive risk assessments are essential to understand the implications of their widespread use and ensure that efficacy and safety are adequately addressed in regulatory frameworks. Current regulations often do not account for the unique characteristics of NPs, highlighting an urgent need for updated legislation emphasizing biocompatibility and toxicity testing. Moreover, further research is crucial to elucidate the long-term ecological impacts of CuO NPs. Investigations should explore their environmental behavior, accumulation in soil and plants, and interactions with other agrochemicals. Addressing practical considerations—scalability, cost-effectiveness, and ease of integration into existing farming systems—will encourage farmer adoption of CuO NP-based products. Overcoming barriers related to education, training, and product accessibility is also necessary for successful implementation. In summary, while CuO NPs offer significant advantages for pest management and plant health, a balanced and collaborative approach involving researchers, regulatory bodies, and agricultural stakeholders is imperative. By prioritizing environmental safety, human health, and regulatory compliance, the agricultural community can effectively navigate the challenges associated with CuO NPs, ensuring their sustainable integration into agricultural practices.

Availability of data and materials

Data are available upon request from the corresponding author.

References

  1. United Nations, Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Population Division. Population 2030: Demographic challenges and opportunities for sustainable development planning. 2015. Report No.: (ST/ESA/SER.A/389). https://www.un.org/en/development/desa/population/publications/pdf/trends/Population2030.pdf

  2. Muradi AJ, Boz I. The contribution of agriculture sector in the economy of Afghanistan. Int J Sci Res Manage. 2018;6(10):750–5.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Broberg MC, Uddling J, Mills G, Pleijel H. Fertilizer efficiency in wheat is reduced by ozone pollution. Sci Total Environ. 2017;607–608:876–80.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Figueroa M, Hammond-Kosack KE, Solomon PS. A review of wheat diseases—a field perspective. Mol Plant Pathol. 2018;19(6):1523–36.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Francis DV, Abdalla AK, Mahakham W, Sarmah AK, Ahmed ZFR. Interaction of plants and metal nanoparticles: Exploring its molecular mechanisms for sustainable agriculture and crop improvement. Environ Int. 2024;30: 108859.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Singh S, Sangwan S, Sharma P, Devi P, Moond M. Nanotechnology for sustainable agriculture: an emerging perspective. J Nanosci Nanotechnol. 2021;21(6):3453–65.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Ji H, Guo Z, Wang G, Wang X, Liu H. Effect of ZnO and CuO nanoparticles on the growth, nutrient absorption, and potential health risk of the seasonal vegetable Medicago polymorpha L. PeerJ. 2022;10: e14038.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  8. Kah M, Kookana R. Emerging investigator series: nanotechnology to develop novel agrochemicals: critical issues to consider in the global agricultural context. Environ Science: Nano. 2017;4(9):1784–97.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Liu P, Ren Z, Ding W, Kong D, Hermanowicz SW, Huang Y. Comparative environmental impact assessment of copper-based nanopesticides and conventional pesticides. ACS Agric Sci Sci Technol. 2023;3(7):593–600.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Wani KA, Kothari R. Agricultural nanotechnology: applications and challenges. Ann Plant Sci. 2018;7(3):2146.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Tiwari E, Khandelwal N, Singh N, Biswas S, Darbha GK. Effect of clay colloid – CuO nanoparticles interaction on retention of nanoparticles in different types of soils: role of clay fraction and environmental parameters. Environ Res. 2022;203: 111885.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Ogwuegbu MC, Ayangbenro AS, Mthiyane DM, Babalola OO, Onwudiwe DC. Green synthesis of CuO nanoparticles using Ligustrum lucidum extract, and the antioxidant and antifungal evaluation. Mater Res Express. 2024;11(5): 055010.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Muhammad A, He J, Yu T, Sun C, Shi D, Jiang Y, et al. Dietary exposure of copper and zinc oxides nanoparticles affect the fitness, enzyme activity, and microbial community of the model insect, silkworm Bombyx mori. Sci Total Environ. 2022;813: 152608.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Kohatsu MY, Lange CN, Pelegrino MT, Pieretti JC, Tortella G, Rubilar O, Batista BL, Seabra AB, de Jesus TA. Foliar spraying of biogenic CuO nanoparticles protects the defence system and photosynthetic pigments of lettuce (Lactuca sativa). J Clean Prod. 2021;324: 129264.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Sarkar N, Sharma RS, Kaushik M. Innovative application of facile single pot green synthesized CuO and CuO@APTES nanoparticles in nanopriming of Vigna radiata seeds. Environ Sci Pollut Res. 2021;28(11):13221–8.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Singh A, Sengar RS, Sharma R, Raj. Nano-priming technology for sustainable agriculture. Biogeosyst Tech. 2021;8:79–92.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Servin A, Elmer W, Mukherjee A, Torre-Roche RDL, Hamdi H, White JC, Bindraban P, Dimkpa C. A review of the use of engineered nanomaterials to suppress plant disease and enhance crop yield. J Nanopart Res. 2015;17:1–21.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Singh J, Kumar S, Alok A, Upadhyay SK, Rawat M, Tsang DC, Bolan N, Kim KH. The potential of green synthesized zinc oxide nanoparticles as nutrient source for plant growth. J Clean Prod. 2019;214:1061–70.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Qian YA, Haipeng LI, Zhang Y, Yinghao LI, Helian LI. Wheat morphological and biochemical responses to copper oxide nanoparticle treatment in two soils. Pedosphere. 2024;34(4):814–25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Zhu X, Ma X, Gao C, Mu Y, Pei Y, Liu C, Zou A, Sun X. Fabrication of CuO nanoparticles composite ε-polylysine-alginate nanogel for high-efficiency management of Alternaria alternate. Int J Biol Macromol. 2022;223:1208–22.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Chen JN, Wu LT, Kun SO, Zhu YS, Wei DI. Nonphytotoxic copper oxide nanoparticles are powerful “nanoweapons” that trigger resistance in tobacco against the soil-borne fungal pathogen Phytophthora nicotianae. J Integr Agric. 2022;21(11):3245–62.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Karmous I, Vaidya S, Dimkpa C, Zuverza-Mena N, da Silva W, Barroso KA, Milagres J, Bharadwaj A, Abdelraheem W, White JC, Elmer WH. Biologically synthesized zinc and copper oxide nanoparticles using Cannabis sativa L. enhance soybean (Glycine max) defense against fusarium virguliforme. Pesticide Biochem Physiol. 2023;194:105486.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Dörner L, Cancellieri C, Rheingans B, Walter M, Kägi R, Schmutz P, Kovalenko MV, Jeurgens LP. Cost-effective sol-gel synthesis of porous CuO nanoparticle aggregates with tunable specific surface area. Sci Rep. 2019;9(1):11758.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  24. Rohilla D, Chaudhary S, Singh N, Batish DR, Singh HP. Agronomic providences of surface functionalized CuO nanoparticles on Vigna radiata. Environ Nanotechnol Monitor Manage. 2020;14: 100338.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Manzoor MA, Shah IH, Ali Sabir I, Ahmad A, Albasher G, Dar AA, Altaf MA, Shakoor A. Environmental sustainable: Biogenic copper oxide nanoparticles as nano-pesticides for investigating bioactivities against phytopathogens. Environ Res. 2023;231: 115941.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Manikandan DB, Arumugam M, Sridhar A, Perumalsamy B, Ramasamy T. Sustainable fabrication of hybrid silver-copper nanocomposites (Ag-CuO NCs) using Ocimum americanum L. as an effective regime against antibacterial, anticancer, photocatalytic dye degradation and microalgae toxicity. Environ Res. 2023;228: 115867.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Jassal PS, Kaur D, Prasad R, Singh J. Green synthesis of titanium dioxide nanoparticles: development and applications. J Agric Food Res. 2022;10: 100361.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Singh K, Singh G, Singh J. Sustainable synthesis of biogenic ZnO NPs for mitigation of emerging pollutants and pathogens. Environ Res. 2023;219: 114952.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Farooq A, Javad S, Jabeen K, Ali Shah A, Ahmad A, Shah AN, Alyemeni MN, Mosa WF, Abbas A. Effect of calcium oxide, zinc oxide nanoparticles and their combined treatments on growth and yield attributes of Solanum lycopersicum L. J King Saud Univ Sci. 2023;35(5): 102647.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Altabbaa S, Kumari A, Sharma R, Parashar A, Thakur N. South African journal of botany Chitosan-coated ZnO nanocomposites of Lantana camara and Rhamnus triquetra for effective antimicrobial activity. S Afr J Bot. 2023;161:126–39.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Singh A, Singh NB, Hussain I, Singh H. Effect of biologically synthesized copper oxide nanoparticles on metabolism and antioxidant activity to the crop plants Solanum lycopersicum and Brassica oleracea var. botrytis. J Biotechnol. 2017;262:11–27.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Shah IH, Ashraf M, Sabir IA, Manzoor MA, Malik MS, Gulzar S, Ashraf F, Iqbal J, Niu Q, Zhang Y. Green synthesis and characterization of copper oxide nanoparticles using Calotropis procera leaf extract and their different biological potentials. J Mol Struct. 2022;1259: 132696.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. Savary S, Willocquet L, Pethybridge SJ, Esker P, McRoberts N, Nelson A. The global burden of pathogens and pests on major food crops. Nat Ecol Evolut. 2019;3(3):430–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Dayarathne MC, Mridha AU, Wang Y. Diagnosis of fungal plant pathogens using conventional and molecular approaches. Diagn Plant Dis. 2020. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.5772/intechopen.94980.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Fang Y, Zhang L, Jiao Y, Liao J, Luo L, Ji S, Li J, Dai K, Zhu S, Yang M. Tobacco rotated with rapeseed for soil-borne phytophthora pathogen biocontrol: mediated by rapeseed root exudates. Front Microbiol. 2016;7:1–11.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  36. Ceresini PC, Silva TC, Vicentini SNC, Júnior RPL, Moreira SI, Castro-Ríos K, Garcés-Fiallos FR, Krug LD, de Moura SS, da Silva AG, de Paiva Custódio AA. Strategies for managing fungicide resistance in the Brazilian tropical agroecosystem: safeguarding food safety, health, and the environmental quality. Tropical Plant Pathol. 2024;49(1):36–70.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Nehra M, Dilbaghi N, Marrazza G, Kaushik A, Sonne C, Kim KH, Kumar S. Emerging nanobiotechnology in agriculture for the management of pesticide residues. J Hazard Mater. 2021;401: 123369.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Hou C, Wei N, Liang Q, Tan Y, Li X, Feng J. Nano-pesticide delivery system based on UiO -66 with pH sensitivity for precise control of Spodoptera frugiperda. Pest Manag Sci. 2024;81(2):798–808.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Dangi K, Verma AK. Efficient & eco-friendly smart nano-pesticides: Emerging prospects for agriculture. Mater Today Proc. 2021;45:3819–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Balu SK, Andra S, Jeevanandam J, Kulabhusan PK, Khamari A, Vedarathinam V, Hamimed S, San Chan Y, Danquah MK. Exploring the potential of metal oxide nanoparticles as fungicides and plant nutrient boosters. Crop Prot. 2023;174: 106398.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  41. Zabrieski Z, Morrell E, Hortin J, Dimkpa C, McLean J, Britt D, Anderson A. Pesticidal activity of metal oxide nanoparticles on plant pathogenic isolates of Pythium. Ecotoxicology. 2015;24:1305–14.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Elmer WH, Zuverza-Mena N, Triplett LR, Roberts EL, Silady RA, White JC. Foliar application of copper oxide nanoparticles suppresses fusarium wilt development on chrysanthemum. Environ Sci Technol. 2021;55(15):10805–10.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Rahman A, Pittarate S, Perumal V, Rajula J, Thungrabeab M, Mekchay S, et al. Larvicidal and antifeedant effects of copper nano-pesticides against Spodoptera frugiperda (J.E. Smith) and its immunological response. Insects. 2022;13(11):1030.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  44. Ayoub HA, Khairy M, Elsaid S, Rashwan FA, Abdel-Hafez HF. Pesticidal activity of nanostructured metal oxides for generation of alternative pesticide formulations. J Agric Food Chem. 2018;66(22):5491–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Saritha GNG, Anju T, Kumar A. Nanotechnology-big impact: how nanotechnology is changing the future of agriculture? J Agric Food Res. 2022;10: 100457.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  46. Jakhar AM, Aziz I, Kaleri AR, Hasnain M, Haider G, Ma J, Abideen Z. Nano-fertilizers: A sustainable technology for improving crop nutrition and food security. NanoImpact. 2022;27: 100411.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Gupta A, Rayeen F, Mishra R, Tripathi M, Pathak N. Nanotechnology applications in sustainable agriculture: an emerging eco-friendly approach. Plant Nano Biol. 2023;4: 100033.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Saurabh K, Prakash V, Dubey AK, Ghosh S, Kumari A, Sundaram PK, Jeet P, Sarkar B, Upadhyaya A, Das A, Kumar S. Enhancing sustainability in agriculture with nanofertilizers. Dis Appl Sci. 2024;6(11):559.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Elsabagh SS, Elkhatib EA, Rashad M. Novel nano-fertilizers derived from drinking water industry waste for sustained release of macronutrients: performance, kinetics and sorption mechanisms. Scientific Repor. 2024;14(1):5691.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  50. Alhaithloul HAS, Ali B, Alghanem SMS, Zulfiqar F, Al-Robai SA, Ercisli S, Yong JW, Moosa A, Irfan E, Ali Q, Irshad MA. Effect of green-synthesized copper oxide nanoparticles on growth, physiology, nutrient uptake, and cadmium accumulation in Triticum aestivum (L.). Ecotoxicol Environ Safety. 2023;268: 115701.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. Sedefoglu N, Er S, Veryer K, Zalaoglu Y, Bozok F. Green synthesized CuO nanoparticles using macrofungi extracts: characterization, nanofertilizer and antibacterial effects. Mater Chem Phys. 2023;309: 128393.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  52. Ibrahim AS, Ali GAM, Hassanein A, Attia AM, Marzouk ER. Toxicity and uptake of CuO nanoparticles: Evaluation of an emerging nanofertilizer on wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) plant. Sustainability. 2022;14(9):4914.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  53. Hanif S, Bilal M, Nasreen S, Latif M, Zia M. Indole-3-acetic acid (IAA) doping on the surface of CuO-NPs reduces the toxic effects of NPs on Lactuca sativa. J Biotechnol. 2023;367:53–61.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Nekoukhou M, Fallah S, Pokhrel LR, Abbasi-Surki A, Rostamnejadi A. Foliar enrichment of copper oxide nanoparticles promotes biomass, photosynthetic pigments, and commercially valuable secondary metabolites and essential oils in dragonhead (Dracocephalum moldavica L.) under semi-arid conditions. Sci Total Environ. 2023;863:160920.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. Alhaithloul HA, Ali B, Alghanem SM, Zulfiqar F, Al-Robai SA, Ercisli S, Yong JW, Moosa A, Irfan E, Ali Q, Irshad MA. Effect of green-synthesized copper oxide nanoparticles on growth, physiology, nutrient uptake, and cadmium accumulation in Triticum aestivum (L.). Ecotoxicol Environ Safety. 2023;268:115701.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  56. Mustafa M, Azam M, Nawaz Bhatti H, Khan A, Zafar L, Rehan Abbasi AM. Green fabrication of copper nano-fertilizer for enhanced crop yield in cowpea cultivar: a sustainable approach. Biocatal Agric Biotechnol. 2024;56: 102994.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  57. Martins MAR, Kiirika LM, Schaffer N, Sajnóg A, Coutinho JAP, Franklin G, Mondal D. Unveiling dissolution kinetics of CuO nanofertilizer using bio-based ionic liquids envisaging controlled use efficiency for sustainable agriculture. ACS Sustain Res Manage. 2024;1(6):1291–301.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  58. Deng C, Wang Y, Cantu JM, Valdes C, Navarro G, Cota-Ruiz K, Hernandez-Viezcas JA, Li C, Elmer WH, Dimkpa CO, White JC. Soil and foliar exposure of soybean (Glycine max) to Cu: nanoparticle coating-dependent plant responses. NanoImpact. 2022;26: 100406.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  59. Francis DV, Sood N, Gokhale T. Biogenic CuO and ZnO nanoparticles as nanofertilizers for sustainable growth of Amaranthus hybridus. Plants. 2022;11(20):2776.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  60. Adhikari T, Sarkar D, Mashayekhi H, Xing B. Growth and enzymatic activity of maize (Zea mays L.) plant: solution culture test for copper dioxide nano particles. J Plant Nutr. 2016;39(1):99–115.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  61. Wang Y, Lin Y, Xu Y, Yin Y, Guo H, Du W. Divergence in response of lettuce (var. ramosa Hort.) to copper oxide nanoparticles/microparticles as potential agricultural fertilizer. Environ Pollut Bioavail. 2019;31(1):80–4.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  62. Shelar A, Singh AV, Maharjan RS, Laux P, Luch A, Gemmati D, Tisato V, Singh SP, Santilli MF, Shelar A, Chaskar M. Sustainable agriculture through multidisciplinary seed nanopriming: prospects of opportunities and challenges. Cells. 2021;10(9):2428.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  63. Sonawane H, Arya S, Math S, Shelke D. Myco-synthesized silver and titanium oxide nanoparticles as seed priming agents to promote seed germination and seedling growth of Solanum lycopersicum: a comparative study. Int Nano Lett. 2021;11(4):371–9.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  64. Imtiaz H, Shiraz M, Mir AR, Siddiqui H, Hayat S. Nano-priming techniques for plant physio-biochemistry and stress tolerance. J Plant Growth Regul. 2023;42(11):6870–90.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  65. Busnaina AA, Mead J, Isaacs J, Somu S. Nanomanufacturing and sustainability: opportunities and challenges. In: Busnaina AA, editor. Nanotechnology for sustainable development. Cham: Springer; 2014. p. 331–6.

    Google Scholar 

  66. Vlachý J. The value of innovation in nanotechnology. Eng Econ. 2017;28(5):535–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  67. Pereira DESA, Oliveira CH, Fraceto FL, Santaella C. Nanotechnology potential in seed priming for sustainable agriculture. Nanomaterials. 2021;11(2):267.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  68. Pandey D, Singh A, Darbinyan N, Chakhmakhchyan AD, Parmar SS, Ghazaryan K. Revolutionizing sustainable agriculture with nano-priming technology: a leap towards resilient and high-yield crops. In: Pandey D, editor. Nanotechnology applications and innovations for improved soil health. Amsterdam: Elseiver; 2024. p. 305–15.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  69. Banerjee S, Islam J, Mondal S, Saha A, Saha B, Sen A. Proactive attenuation of arsenic-stress by nano-priming: Zinc oxide nanoparticles in Vigna mungo (L.) Hepper trigger antioxidant defense response and reduce root-shoot arsenic translocation. J Hazard Mater. 2023;446:130735.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  70. Faraz A, Faizan M, Rajput DV, Minkina T, Hayat S, Faisal M, Alatar AA, Abdel-Salam EM. CuO nanoparticle-mediated seed priming improves physio-biochemical and enzymatic activities of Brassica juncea. Plants. 2023;12(4):803.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  71. Sharma D, Afzal S, Singh NK. Nanopriming with phytosynthesized zinc oxide nanoparticles for promoting germination and starch metabolism in rice seeds. J Biotechnol. 2021;336:64–75.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  72. Rai-Kalal P, Jajoo A. Priming with zinc oxide nanoparticles improve germination and photosynthetic performance in wheat. Plant Physiol Biochem. 2021;160:341–51.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  73. Adhikari T, Kundu S, Biswas AK, Tarafdar JC, Rao AS. Effect of copper oxide nano particle on seed germination of selected crops. J Agric Sci Technol. 2012;2(6A):815.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  74. Khalaki MA, Moameri M, Lajayer BA, Astatkie T. Influence of nano-priming on seed germination and plant growth of forage and medicinal plants. Plant Growth Regul. 2021;93(1):13–28.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  75. Dulta K, Koşarsoy Ağçeli G, Chauhan P, Jasrotia R, Chauhan PK, Ighalo JO. Multifunctional CuO nanoparticles with enhanced photocatalytic dye degradation and antibacterial activity. Sustain Environ Res. 2022;32:1–52.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  76. Botsa SM, Ramadevi D, Basavaiah K. A facile synthesis of copper oxide nanorods for photocatalytic degradation of organic pollutant and inactivation of pathogens. J Nanosci Technol. 2018;4(5):467–70.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  77. Ali M, Ijaz M, Ikram M, Ul-Hamid A, Avais M, Anjum AA. Biogenic synthesis, characterization and antibacterial potential evaluation of copper oxide nanoparticles against Escherichia coli. Nanoscale Res Lett. 2021;16(1):148.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  78. Bhuvaneshwari V, Vaidehi D, Logpriya S. Green synthesis of copper oxide nanoparticles for biological applications. Microbiol Curr Res. 2018;2(1):10.

    Google Scholar 

  79. Lakshimi K, Jayashree M, Shakila BK. Green and chemically synthesized copper oxide nanoparticles-A preliminary research towards its toxic behaviour. Int J Pharm Pharm Sci. 2015;7(13):156–60.

    Google Scholar 

  80. Chahar R, Mukherji MD. Environmental applications of phytonanotechnology: a promise to sustainable future. In: Shah MP, Roy A, editors. phytonanotechnology. Singapore: Springer Nature Singapore; 2022. p. 141–59.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  81. Sarathi R, Sundar SM, Jayamurugan P, Ganganagunta S, Sudhadevi D, Ubaidullah M, Pandit B, Gupta M, Sehgal SS, Rao NS. Impacts of pH on photocatalytic efficiency, the control of energy and morphological properties of CuO nanoparticles for industrial wastewater treatment applications. Mater Sci Eng. 2023;298: 116856.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  82. Dhas CR, Malar KCMG, Venkatesh R, Arivukarasan D, Monica SES, Keerthana S. Insights on photocatalytic dye inactivation and antimicrobial activity of pH-dependent facile synthesised copper oxide nanoparticles. Appl Phys A. 2021;127(12):891.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  83. Khan R, Inam MA, Park DR, Khan S, Akram M, Yeom IT. The removal of CuO nanoparticles from water by conventional treatment C/F/S: The effect of pH and natural organic matter. Molecules. 2019;24(5):914.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  84. Siddiqui H, Qureshi MS, Haque FZ. pH-dependent single-step rapid synthesis of CuO nanoparticles and their optical behavior. Opt Spectrosc. 2017;123:903–12.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  85. Peng C, Shen C, Zheng S, Yang W, Hu H, Liu J, Shi J. Transformation of CuO nanoparticles in the aquatic environment: influence of pH, electrolytes and natural organic matter. Nanomaterials. 2017;7(10):326.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  86. Arunkumar B, Jeyakumar SJ, Jothibas M. Study on the efficiency of biomedical and degradation of dye through CuO nanoparticles synthesized at various molar concentrations. In: Arunkumar B, editor. Progress in chemical science research. Amsterdam: Elseiver; 2023. p. 144–63.

    Google Scholar 

  87. Qiu Y, Mu Z, Wang N, Wang X, Xu M, Li H. The aggregation and sedimentation of two different sized copper oxide nanoparticles in soil solutions: dependence on pH and dissolved organic matter. Sci Total Environ. 2020;731: 139215.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  88. Liu S, Liu Y, Pan B, He Y, Li B, Zhou D, Xiao Y, Qiu H, Vijver MG, Peijnenburg WJ. The promoted dissolution of copper oxide nanoparticles by dissolved humic acid: copper complexation over particle dispersion. Chemosphere. 2020;245: 125612.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  89. Khort A, Brookman-Amissah M, Hedberg J, Chang T, Mei N, Lundberg A, Sturve J, Blomberg E, Odnevall I. Influence of natural organic matter on the transformation of metal and metal oxide nanoparticles and their ecotoxic potency in vitro. NanoImpact. 2022;25: 100386.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  90. Yu Q, Wang Z, Wang G, Peijnenburg WJGM, Vijver MG. Effects of natural organic matter on the joint toxicity and accumulation of Cu nanoparticles and ZnO nanoparticles in Daphnia magna. Environ Pollut. 2022;292: 118413.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  91. Tiwari E, Singh N, Khandelwal N, Ganie ZA, Choudhary A, Monikh FA, Darbha GK. Impact of nanoplastic debris on the stability and transport of metal oxide nanoparticles: Role of varying soil solution chemistry. Chemosphere. 2022;308: 136091.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  92. Chao SJ, Huang CP, Lam CC, Hua LC, Chang SH, Huang C. Transformation of copper oxide nanoparticles as affected by ionic strength and its effects on the toxicity and bioaccumulation of copper in zebrafish embryo. Ecotoxicol Environ Saf. 2021;225: 112759.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  93. Wu H, Fang H, Xu C, Ye J, Cai Q, Shi J. Transport and retention of copper oxide nanoparticles under unfavorable deposition conditions caused by repulsive van der Waals force in saturated porous media. Environ Pollut. 2020;256: 113400.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  94. Labanni A, Nasir M, Arief S. Research progress and prospect of copper oxide nanoparticles with controllable nanostructure, morphology, and function via green synthesis. Mater Today Sustain. 2023;24: 100526.

    Google Scholar 

  95. Woźniak-Budych MJ, Staszak K, Staszak M. Copper and copper-based nanoparticles in medicine—perspectives and challenges. Molecules. 2023;28(18):6687.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  96. Bucchianico SD, Fabbrizi MR, Misra SK, Valsami-Jones E, Berhanu D, Reip P, Bergamaschi E, Migliore L. Multiple cytotoxic and genotoxic effects induced in vitro by differently shaped copper oxide nanomaterials. Mutagenesis. 2013;28(3):287–99.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  97. Chatterjee R. The challenge of regulating nanomaterials. Environ Sci Technol. 2008;42(2):339–43.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  98. Arif N, Yadav V, Singh S, Tripathi DK, Dubey NK, Chauhan DK, Chauhan DK, Giorgetti L. Interaction of copper oxide nanoparticles with plants. In: Arif N, editor. Nanomaterials in plants, algae, and microorganisms. Amsterdam: Elseiver; 2018. p. 297–230.

    Google Scholar 

  99. Peixoto S, Morgado RG, Prodana M, Cardoso DN, Malheiro C, Neves J, Santos C, Khodaparast Z, Pavlaki MD, Rodrigues S, Rodrigues SM. Responses of soil microbiome to copper-based materials (nano and bulk) for agricultural applications: an indoor-mesocosm experiment. NanoImpact. 2024;34: 100506.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We are grateful to anonymous reviewers for their valuable comments.

Funding

Not applicable.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Zoology, Faculty of Biology, Kabul University, Kart-E-Char, Kabul, 1006, Afghanistan

    Naweedullah Amin

  2. Department of Chemical Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Faryab University, Maymana, 1801, Afghanistan

    Khalida Aziz

Authors
  1. Naweedullah Amin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

  2. Khalida Aziz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

Conceptualization, formal analysis, N.A.; validation, visualization, K.A.; writing, reviewing, and editing, N.A. and K.A. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Naweedullah Amin.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License, which permits any non-commercial use, sharing, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if you modified the licensed material. You do not have permission under this licence to share adapted material derived from this article or parts of it. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Amin, N., Aziz, K. Copper oxide-based nanoparticles in agro-nanotechnology: advances and applications for sustainable farming. Agric & Food Secur 14, 7 (2025). https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1186/s40066-025-00530-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1186/s40066-025-00530-7

Keywords

Agriculture & Food Security

ISSN: 2048-7010