Advantages and Disadvantages of use of Nano-pesticides to control

stored grains insect pest

Student name Student ID

Tutor/instructor name

Institution name

Date

1|
Table of contents
Introduction......................................................................................................................................5
Objectives of Nano-pesticide...........................................................................................................6
Nano-pesticides................................................................................................................................7
Improve Crop Production Using Nanomaterial’s..........................................................................10
The advantages and characteristics of nanotechnology-based pesticide formulations..................11
Scientific difficulties and challenges.............................................................................................14
Pesticide Nano-formulations for water-based dispersion..............................................................16
Market availability.........................................................................................................................18
Demand..........................................................................................................................................19
Market Insights..............................................................................................................................20
Nano-pesticides, 2019-2027, Global Pre-and Post-COVID 19 Markets (USD Million)..............21
Global Nano-pesticides Market Share by Type, 2019...................................................................22
Global Nano-pesticides Market Share by Application, 2019........................................................22
Global Nano-pesticides Market Share by Region, 2019...............................................................23
Global Nano-pesticides Market, Company Share 2019................................................................24
Mode of action...............................................................................................................................24
Stored product insects....................................................................................................................26
Flour and grain beetles...............................................................................................................26
Saw-toothed grain beetle............................................................................................................26
Flour beetle confusion and red flour beetle...............................................................................27
Anobiid beetles..........................................................................................................................29
Cigarette beetle..........................................................................................................................29
Drugstore beetle.........................................................................................................................29
Dermestid beetles.......................................................................................................................30
Cabinet beetles...........................................................................................................................31
Carpet beetles.............................................................................................................................31
Larder beetles.............................................................................................................................32
Weevils.......................................................................................................................................32
Seed weevils...............................................................................................................................32
Grain weevils.............................................................................................................................33

2|
 Spider beetles.............................................................................................................................34
Mealworms.................................................................................................................................35
Yellow mealworm and dark mealworm.....................................................................................35
Flour moths................................................................................................................................35
Indian meal moth.......................................................................................................................36
Mediterranean flour moth..........................................................................................................37
Grain moths................................................................................................................................37
Angoumois grain moth...............................................................................................................37
Psocids.......................................................................................................................................38
Grain mites.................................................................................................................................38
Control.......................................................................................................................................38
Prevention..................................................................................................................................39
Elimination.................................................................................................................................39
Damages Caused By Insecticide Use.........................................................................................41
Advantages of the Use of Nano-Pesticides over Conventional Pesticides....................................43
Disadvantages of insecticides....................................................................................................44
Environmental impact of pesticides...........................................................................................44
Water..........................................................................................................................................47
Rules that are primarily concerned with water..........................................................................48
Soil.............................................................................................................................................48
Impact on living beings.................................................................................................................50
Plants..........................................................................................................................................50
Crop spraying.............................................................................................................................50
Pollinators..................................................................................................................................50
Animals......................................................................................................................................51
Birds...........................................................................................................................................51
Humans......................................................................................................................................53
Future Perspectives........................................................................................................................55
Conclusion.....................................................................................................................................56
References......................................................................................................................................58

3|
Figure 1: Pesticide usage that is inefficient results in a wide range of environmental issues.......14
Figure 2: Ineffectiveness of traditional pesticide formulations.....................................................16
Figure 3: Pesticide characteristics may be improved by using Nano-based formulations............18
Figure 4: Nano-based pesticide formulation diagram...................................................................19
Figure 5: Reducing the size of pesticides increases their absorption and efficacy........................21
Figure 6: Formulation of Nano-based pesticides depends on four aspects...................................22
Figure 7: A diagram showing the water-based dispersion Nano-formulation of pesticides..........23
Figure 8: Nano-formulation's impact on degradation and biosafety is being studied...................31
Figure 9: Grass saw-tooth beetles..................................................................................................33
Figure 10: Red flour beetle............................................................................................................34
Figure 11: Cigarette beetle.............................................................................................................35
Figure 12: Drugstore beetle...........................................................................................................36
Figure 13: Cabinet beetle...............................................................................................................37
Figure 14: Black carpet beetle.......................................................................................................37
Figure 15: Larder beetle.................................................................................................................38
Figure 16: Bean weevil..................................................................................................................38
Figure 17: Weevil larva on the left, granary weevil in the Centre, and rice weevil on the right...39
Figure 18: Spider beetles of the brown and American varieties are seen here..............................40
Figure 19: Mealworm....................................................................................................................41
Figure 20: Indian meal moth..........................................................................................................42
Figure 21: Angoumois moth..........................................................................................................43
Figure 22: Grain mites and psocids...............................................................................................44
Figure 23: Pesticide pathways.......................................................................................................53

4|
Introduction

Preventing and mitigating biological catastrophes, as well as boosting agricultural yields, are

both made feasible because to Nano-pesticide usage (Godfray, et al.). More than a third of the

world's agricultural output has been resurrected since the beginning of this century because to

pesticides. In order to create a feasible formulation for pesticide application, the majority of

active compounds in pesticides must be mixed with an organic solvent, an emulsifier, and other

auxiliary components that are insoluble in water. Conventional pesticide formulations, on the

other hand, are inefficiently used because of off-target losses (Petosa et al. 2017). As much as 70

percent of the pesticide's loss and degradation on crop foliar surfaces occurs during field

application due to spray dispersion, runoff, and rolling down. This has led in a wide range of

undesirable outcomes, including pest resistance, danger to people and non-target creatures, and

environmental contamination (Rajput et al. 2017).

Additionally, agrochemical firms are working hard to develop new pesticide formulations in

order to reduce the environmental effect of the pesticides they already use (Deshpande, et al.

2011). Nanotechnology and Nano-materials have a promising future in agricultural development

that is based on long-term sustainability. Since it possesses all of the aforementioned

distinguishing characteristics (such as its Nano-scale size and chemical composition), it has great

promise for application in the creation of Nano-based smart pesticide formulations to alleviate

the problems mentioned above. Innovative formulations are designed to increase pesticide

performance while simultaneously lowering application frequency and dosages by frequent,

accurate, lengthy, and targeted delivery of pesticides (Selvam et al., 2017). You can make Nano-

pesticides two ways: either by converting them into Nano-sized pesticide particles directly, or by

putting them on Nano-sized carriers and developing delivery mechanisms. We can go either way.

5|
On one hand, there are studies on the effectiveness and destiny of previously existing Nano-

pesticides; on the other, there are studies on newer, novel Nano-formulations intended to carry

out particular activities. Researchers are increasingly focused on creating new sticky Nano-

pesticides. As crop foliage microstructure changes, affinity groups may be employed to modify

the surface of Nano-pesticides, enhancing adhesion and decreasing loss through scattering or

rolling off on crop foliage (Ohl et al., 2017). Researchers have studied the use of natural

adhesives like ply dopamine in pesticide application coverings in great detail. Dopamine

extraction, on the other hand, is a labor-intensive and costly process. It is more practical to

employ the inexpensive natural polyphenol tannic acid as an adhesive coating for Nano-

pesticides, which can be extracted from a wide range of plants (Garnett et al., 2014).

Objectives of Nano-pesticide

 There has been a significant increase in the efficiency of pesticide dispersal to action

targets including plants, insects and diseases.

 Controlling pesticide discharge at the lowest possible dose in order to eradicate pests and

diseases (Tufenkji et al,).

 Two advantages of this approach are that fat-soluble chemicals are more easily dissolved

and dispersed in water (Knauer ET al.2012).

 Enhancing light-sensitive compounds' chemical stability by minimizing photo

degradation; and enhancing pesticides' bioavailability for long-term use.

 Nano-Pesticide applications and treatments may be reduced by extending the pesticide's

long-term efficacy (Bucheli et al., 2012).

 Safeguarding the ecosystem's ecological variety (Gogos ET al.2012).

6|
  Food contamination and pesticide residues are reduced since the least bit of pesticide is

lost (Gottschalk et al. 2013)

Nano-pesticides

Pesticides are chemicals used to kill, reduce, or repel insects, weeds, rodents, fungi, and other

organisms that may be hazardous to human health or the economy, for example. Aside from

being harmful to people, pesticides may also pose a danger because they target systems or

enzymes in pests that are similar to those in humans (Ghormade et al.) Insecticides, fungicides,

rodenticides, and pediculicides are all examples of pesticides that may be categorized by their

target pest or its chemical identity (i.e., pyrethroids, organophosphates, organochlorines,

carbamates, glyphosate, triazoles). Pesticides are crucial in agriculture because they protect crops

against biological disasters, boost agricultural productivity, and ensure that crop yields continue

to grow consistently over time (Sun et al.2013) It is possible to dramatically increase pesticide

dispersion, stability, duration, and effectiveness by including nanoparticles into the formulation

process. As a result, nanomaterial’s have unique qualities, such as their tiny size and surface

area, as well as their capacity to be quickly manipulated by adding surface groups. While Nano-

based formulations have many advantages, they also have many challenges and scientific issues

that must be addressed in order to improve pesticide effectiveness and safety (Nowak et al.,

2013).

The world's population has surpassed the 9.7 billion mark, making food supply a major challenge

for the agricultural business (Johnson ET al.2017). Herbicides and fertilizers are thus necessary

to boost agricultural productivity in the United States (De Oliveira et al., 2014). Nano-Pesticides

are crucial in agriculture because they protect crops against biological disasters, boost

agricultural productivity, and ensure that crop yields will continue to grow consistently over

7|
time. United Nations food and agriculture Organization estimates suggest that pest and disease

management using pesticides has recovered 30 percent of overall agricultural product production

around the globe. Despite the fact that pesticides are useful in agriculture, over use of them leads

to waste (Hayles et al.2017) Many negative repercussions have emerged from pesticide use,

including insect resistance, health risks to people and non-target creatures, and pollution of the

environment. Human and non-target organism danger as well as pollution of the environment are

all side effects of pesticide use (Losic et al., 2017).

Figure 1: Pesticide usage that is inefficient results in a wide range of environmental issues.

Active ingredients (AI) in pesticides are usually nontoxic, water-insoluble organic compounds

that need the addition of many other substances before they can be used on crops. These

additional ingredients include carriers, solvents, emulsifiers, dispersants, and other additives.

Traditional pesticide formulations have a high off-target loss rate because of the inefficient way

they are applied throughout the spraying process (Worthley et al. 2013). An analysis found that

plant pesticides had a similar breakdown and loss rate. Active ingredients (AI) in pesticides are

8|
usually nontoxic, water-insoluble organic compounds that need the addition of many other

substances before they can be used on crops. These additional ingredients include carriers,

solvents, emulsifiers, dispersants, and other additives. Traditional pesticide formulations have a

high off-target loss rate because of the inefficient way they are applied throughout the spraying

process. During field application, spray drift, runoff, and rolling down are all possible, have been

predicted to cause a loss and breakdown rate of up to 70% on crop foliar, and the real utilization

is less than 0.1 percent after dust drift and rainfall leaching after the field application of

pesticides Toxic residues, polluted soils, and water contamination are all the consequence of

poor pesticide application. This poses a long-term health risk to humans (Yu et al. 2017). There is

a worldwide interest in these environmental and health concerns. In the development of

sustainable agriculture, the use of nanotechnology to produce Nano-based smart formulations for

pesticides based on the properties of nanoparticles has shown substantial promise in alleviating

these issues. Artificial Intelligence in Nano-based smart formulations might be released with

higher accuracy using targeted distribution or controlled release mechanisms. New improved

Nano-based formulations are being developed that are stable and active in a range of spray

circumstances (sun, heat, and rain), penetrate and deliver to the intended target, extend their

efficacy, and limit runoff into the surrounding regions. They are currently working on this

(Peters et al., 2016). Agricultural nanotechnology applications are a prominent topic here.

Management and use restrictions for Nano-pesticides were recently adopted by the European

Commission and the Environmental Protection Agency of the United States (EPA). There has

also been a lot of work put into producing Nano- pesticide formulations by firms like as Bayer,

DuPont, Syngenta, and others. Crop production and plant protection have already benefited from

the usage of some of these mixtures (Bouwmeester et al., 2016).

9|
 Figure 2: Ineffectiveness of traditional pesticide formulations

Source: (U.S. EPA)

Improve Crop Production Using Nanomaterial’s

Our fast-paced, highly crowded world needs large-scale manufacturing of low-cost, high-quality

food. Concerns about agricultural pesticide use are common when it comes to meeting the

growing needs of the worldwide populace (Ihsan et al., 2007). When it comes to pest

management, pesticides have a high short-term efficacy rate. The long-term effects on human

health and the ecosystem of pesticides, however, remain unclear. Before making a decision, it's

vital to weigh the benefits and drawbacks of pesticide use, regardless of whether you're a farmer

or a customer (Cheema et al., 2007).

One of the main purposes of using pesticides is to keep pests from invading a plant and to control

the development of the plant itself. The use of pesticides offers a number of important benefits.

These benefits are categorized into primary and secondary advantages, respectively (Mian ET

al.2007). The key benefits of this practice are improved crop and livestock quality and increased

crop and animal output. Secondary benefits include increased food security, increased export

revenue, and a decrease in the spread of disease across international boundaries (Mahmood et al.

10 |
2007). As a short-term solution, pesticides reduce the loss of crops, land, water, labor, and other

limited natural resources. According to one estimate, insecticides costing roughly $10 billion a

year save farmers around $40 billion in agricultural production every year.

In contrast, the detrimental effects of overuse of pesticides are severe. In addition to reducing

honeybees and pollination and causing agricultural losses, pesticide usage has resulted in a wide

range of other problems, including bird deaths and groundwater contamination (Sheng et al.,

2014). A study has revealed that pesticide-induced microorganism mortality or damage has an

impact on soil fertility. Aside from this potential immunotoxicity, pesticide exposure may lead to

hypersensitivity (allergy) and autoimmune diseases as well as inflammation in people (Jia ET

al.2014) Exposure to pesticides may have particularly harmful effects on children. Cancer is

more likely to occur in those who work with pesticides on a regular basis, such as farmers,

because of their exposure to them. Each year, pesticides are to blame for the non-lethal

poisonings and cancer cases of tens of thousands of people (Zhou et al., 2014).

The advantages and characteristics of nanotechnology-based pesticide formulations

Currently, the primary emphasis of nanotechnology research and development is on materials

that have at least one dimension in the nanometer (1-100 nm) range. At a critical length scale of

less than 100 nm, this is a critical length scale, some particles display a variety of size-dependent

characteristics as well as high surface-to-volume ratios and different optical properties. Nano-

Pesticide formulations including nanoparticles are tolerated because they have unique features

that are related with their tiny size (Yao et al. 2017). When additional phenomena (transparency,

turbidity and steady dispersion) are taken into account, the top limit of the upper limit may

sometimes be extended. With their tiny size and large surface area, nanoparticle pesticide

formulations have a lot of promise. Using nanotechnology in pesticides might be a game-

11 |
changer. In pesticide formulations, nanotechnology may improve pesticide properties such as

solubility, dispensability, stability, mobility, and targeted delivery (Li ET al.2009). Aside from

enhancing efficacy, extending effects, lowering doses, providing the ability to control AI release,

and improving the stability of payloads from the environment resulting in a reduction in runoff

or environmental residuals, it has significant potential to improve traditional pesticides' efficacy,

safety, and economic effects (Wang et al., 2009).

Figure 3: Pesticide characteristics may be improved by using Nano-based formulations

(Source: Kah, 2014)

The effectiveness of nanoparticles in a certain application is influenced by their size, shape,

surface charge, crystal phase, and the presence of various modified functional groups. Pesticides

may be made from a variety of sources, including synthetic and natural ones (Tang et al. 2015).

Nano-formulations, such as metals, metallic oxides, non-metallic oxides, carbon and silica-based

materials, ceramics and clays, layered double hydroxide materials, polymers and lipids as well as

dendrites and proteins (Qiu et al., 2018). Other materials include quantum dots. Nano-

12 |
formulations of pesticides are often constructed using metals and metal oxides. It is feasible to

generate Nano-pesticides by one of two routes (Oliveira et al., 2018):

Two instances of nanotechnology in operation are the direct conversion of pesticides into

nanoparticles (Nano-sized pesticides) and the loading of pesticides with Nano-carriers in

delivery systems (Pascoli et al., 2018). In addition to the polymeric shell, pesticides may be

found on the surface of nanoparticles, coupled to the core by ligands, or encased in the polymeric

matrix of Nano-carrier systems. There are several uses for Nano-carrier systems (Wu et al.,

2016).

Figure 4: Nano-based pesticide formulation diagram

(Source: Oskam, 2016)

Numerous varieties of Nano-formulation are available, from emulsions to spheres to Nano-

crystals, and they all have one thing in common: they're all based on nanotechnology (Ojha et al.,

2018). Aqueous Nano-emulsion and Nano-suspension of pesticides make water-insoluble active

ingredients (AIs) more soluble, eliminating the need for toxic organic solvents and ultimately

replacing regularly administered EC products (Sett et al., Chetia et al., Kabiraj et al., Bora et al.,

2018). For ecologically sensitive pesticides, Nano-capsules and Nano-spheres have been
13 |
recommended as a pesticide delivery vehicle, since they may reduce the release of active

ingredients, enhance formulation stability, avoid early degradation, and lengthen the lifespan of

pesticides (Zhou et al., 2008).

Scientific difficulties and challenges

Pesticide effectiveness and environmental impact are influenced by the mode of application. A

pesticide is a chemical that is meant to destroy pests and illnesses that are hazardous to people

and animals (Liang et al. 2017). In contrast, applying insecticides directly to pests or illnesses is

very difficult (Sigh et al.,.2018) Therefore, pesticides are applied to the leaves of crops to create a

hazardous zone, which keeps pests and diseases in a state of toxic stress for a longer length of

time (Talebi et al., 2014). Effective pesticide application calls for addressing efficacy and spray

drift now more than ever. Generally speaking, pesticide active components are difficult to

dissolve in water. Pesticide formulation has a variety of challenges, one of which is improving

the solubility and dispersion of pesticides in water. Because most crop leaf surfaces are very

hydrophobic, liquid deposition is prevented (Liu et al., 2017) Therefore, controlling runoff and

dispersion over hydrophobic foliage is an additional challenge (Yang et al., 2017). Because of the

lower particle size and larger surface area, as shown in Figure 5, pesticide particles that have

been reduced in size have better water dispersion, targeted coverage, and insecticidal action. In

addition, pesticide Nano-formulations may be made to adhere and deposit droplets on leaves

more effectively by modifying their leaf-affinity (Cui et al., 2017).

14 |
 Figure 5: Reducing the size of pesticides increases their absorption and efficacy

(Source: Burton, 2006)

AIs are released and transported from the leaves and kill insects and diseases before they can

reproduce and become pathogens themselves. This process occurs as a result of pesticide

droplets adhering to leaf surfaces after application (Zeng et al. 2017). Formulating Nano-based

pesticides requires consideration of several aspects, Water dispersion, leaf adsorption,

bioavailability, and residual degradation. In order to improve pesticide efficacy and safety, four

important scientific problems need be solved (Cui et al., 2017):

 A pesticide formulation using water-based dispersion construction as a Nano-formulation

 The pesticide delivery system's leaf-targeted deposition and dose transmission

mechanisms are examined in depth.

 Pesticide formulations including nanoparticles are now being studied for their capacity to

enhance bioavailability and for their potential impact on natural degradation and

biosafety of pesticide residues (Rannard et al., 2008).

15 |
Pesticide Nano-formulations for water-based dispersion

There are significant limitations to the use of modern pesticides due to their inability to disperse

in water and other liquids. Organic solvents must be used in large quantities for field dissolving

and spraying due to the difficulty to dissolve (Cui et al. 2017). Applicator exposure is increased

and environmental contaminants are released as a direct result of this rise in product cost. Water-

based pesticide Nano formulations offer increased water solubility and dispersion, uniform leaf

coverage, biological effectiveness, and environmental friendliness because of their tiny particle

size, large surface area, and removal of organic solvents. Because of the small particle size, large

surface area, and lack of organic solvents, this is possible (Liu et al., 2014).

Figure 6: Formulation of Nano-based pesticides depends on four aspects

(Source: Nuruzzaman, 2016)

When it comes to formulating Nano-based formulations, milling and high-pressure

homogenization are two of the most often utilized procedures; although bottom-up processes like

emulsification diffusion and emulsion dispersion are also commonly used in the manufacture of

Nano-based formulations (Rojas et al., 2017). When it comes to increasing formulation features

such as water dispersion or chemical stability, the usage of Nano-capsules and Nano-emulsions

16 |
may be quite beneficial. Nanoparticles, such as Nano-spheres and Nano-micelles, hold great

promise for this use (Zhao et al. 2017).

Figure 7: A diagram showing the water-based dispersion Nano-formulation of pesticides

(Source: Cao, 2008)

There are two parts to the Nano-capsule: the core and the outer shell. The pesticide active

ingredients (AIs) are encased in the core. Biodegradable polymers, such as polycaprolactone

(PCL), polylactic acid (PLA), polyglycolic acid (PGA), poly (lactic-co-glycolic acid) (PLGA),

polyethylene glycol (PEG), chitosan, and others, are often utilized in the shell. As the polymeric

shell deteriorates in the environment, it improves the chemical stability of compounds that are

vulnerable to degradation by ultraviolet (UV) light or soil degradation (Sun et al. 2017). Apart

from that, the membrane polymer utilized to enclose Nano-capsules may increase the wetting,

spreading, and absorbing behaviors of droplets onto leaf surfaces through modified membrane

polymeric leaf affinity. When pesticides are dispersed in the water as Nano-sized droplets, they

form an emulsion similar to that of oil in water, with the surfactant molecules trapped at the

interface. With their small size, rapid dissolving rate, and elimination of toxic organic solvents in

Nano-emulsions, traditional pesticides are more effective and safer (Chhipa et al., 2017).

17 |
Adsorption or trapping inside the Nano-matrix is how insecticides are evenly spread across solid-

sphere vesicular systems (NSVS), also called Nano-spheres (D’souza et al. 2017). There are

several organic polymer and inorganic mesoporous substances that may be utilized to make

Nano-spheres, carbon, non-metal oxides and hollow silica are examples of activated carbons.

Since Nano-spheres can carry a lot of medicine and are gentle on the body, they hold great

promise for the treatment of soil-transmitted illnesses and the control of soil pests. For

encapsulating pesticides in Nano-micelles, bioactive Nano-delivery devices are ideal since they

are smart, bioactive, and tiny in size (H et al., 2017). For example, Nano-micelles may be

activated by the environment and, as a consequence, may change their physical and chemical

properties. For example, a controlled release system based on hydrogen-bonding cross-linked

Nano-micelles has been created. Insecticides were released when the Nano-micelle grew in size

due to the breakdown of hydrogen bonds produced by high temperatures and humidity (Wang et

al. 2017). Because pesticides can't operate in low-temperature, low-humidity environments

instead of the other way around. Pesticide nanoparticle suspensions, known as Nano-

suspensions, are spread throughout the water column. For insoluble or fat-dispersible

compounds, aqueous colloid dispersion methods improve their solubility and dispersion in

solution, allowing for higher biological availability of pesticides while requiring less material

input and labor in large-scale production (Shegokar et al., 2016).

Market availability

Some of the more immediate uses for which nanotechnology has been studied and produced in

agriculture include stress tolerance improvement and crop product shelf life extension, to name

just a few. Other uses include pesticide remediation, animal production, and post-harvest

management of agro-Nano-chemicals. An increasing number of countries are actively selling

18 |
agro-nanotechnology products. As a consequence, 75 businesses from 26 countries offered 230

distinct kinds of Nano-products for diverse agricultural purposes on the worldwide market.

Animal husbandry, fertilizers, plant breeding, soil enhancement, and plant protection were only

some of the many applications for these chemicals. Among the pesticides in this group are

algaecides, biocides, disinfectants, and fumigants. In terms of production, these firms are among

the best: Organic Fertilizing: Reed Mariculture Inc., Prodotti Arca S.r.l., Kimitec Group,

Richfield Fertilizers Pvt., Blue Planet Environmental, Danaflex Nano, Bioteksa, AgriLife,

NanoL and Baltic, DVS BioLife Ltd., Samarita, and Litho (Watterson et al., 2003).

Demand

Companies in both developed and developing countries are involved in multibillion-dollar

agricultural chemical industry, both in developed and developing countries. An increase in

demand for food has happened as a consequence of numerous reasons, including an increase in

the global population, a decrease in the efficiency of food input–output balances, and other

environmental issues as well. To put it another way (Liu et al. 2017): The worldwide market

demand for agrochemicals is predicted to expand by 3.4% between 2020 and 2025, which is a

CAGR of 3.6% for the five-year projection period (Wang et al. 2017). Total market revenue is

estimated at USD 18.7 billion in 2017 and to rise to USD 24.5 billion by 2025, with a compound

yearly growth rate of 4.6% during the projection period for the fungicides category (Srivastava et

al., 2012). Chemicals that are used in the production of agricultural products such as fertilizers

and pesticides come under this umbrella category (Cereals & Grains, Oilseeds, and Fruits &

Vegetables) (Zhang et al. 2017). More than half (48%) of the agrochemical industry's demand

comes from herbicides, which may be found in economically important crops like sugarcane and

rice as well as in other crops including soybean oil palm and rubber trees. In the agrochemical

19 |
sector, companies like Bayer and BASF in Germany, Yara International in Norway, Compass

Minerals in the United States, Syngenta in Switzerland, and Israel's Adama Ltd. are among the

major participants (Dash et al., Konkimalla et al., 2012).

Market Insights

A compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 15% is forecast for the global Nano-pesticides

industry, from USD 410 million in 2019 to more than USD 940 million by 2027 (De Oliveira et

al., Campos et al., Bakshi et al., Abhilash et al., Fraceto et al., 2014).

Nano-pesticides - Global Industry Analysis and Forecast, 2015-2027 (USD Million)

An insecticide that has been microencapsulated is what we mean by a Nano-pesticide.

Encapsulation technology is becoming more popular among crop protection chemical

manufacturers and end users alike due to the many benefits it offers (Butler et al. 2017). Active

chemicals in pesticides are protected from the environment via encapsulation, enabling them to

remain insecticides for a longer time (Cui et al., 2016). An additional benefit of encapsulation is

the ability to manage pesticide release, which enhances their strength and efficacy. By reducing

the spread of pesticides, Nano-pesticides help to the decrease of environmental impact. As a

consequence, the need for Nano-pesticides has increased (Campbell et al. 2008).

20 |
When it comes to the production of Nano-pesticides in 2020, COVID 19 has had an exceptional

impact. International commerce was adversely affected as a result, with a particular focus on

Nano-pesticide import and export (Tan et al. 2017). Nano-pesticides sales are being hampered by

government restrictions on the usage of numerous active chemicals planned for use in the

formulation of Nano-pesticides (Long et al. 2017).

Nano-pesticides, 2019-2027, Global Pre-and Post-COVID 19 Markets (USD Million)

Among the several kinds of pesticides that Nano-pesticides are used for include fungicides,

insecticides, herbicides, and others (Duncalf et al. 2017). Pesticides accounted for more than 40%

of industry revenue in 2020, making them the most lucrative product type category. For the

foreseeable future, insecticides are predicted to hold sway over the global market for Nano-

pesticides. Nano-pesticides are in high demand because crop protection agents with smaller

environmental footprints and controlled release properties are becoming more popular (Giongo

et al., Vendramim et al., Forim et al., 2016).

21 |
Global Nano-pesticides Market Share by Type, 2019

Some of these uses include harvesting and manufacturing as well as protection and packaging. In

agriculture, the demand for Nano-pesticides is growing at an alarming pace because of their

excellent pest control qualities. Using encapsulated pesticides in food processing, preservation,

and packaging are just a few of the many uses for which they are becoming more popular

(Vadivelu et al., 2018).

Global Nano-pesticides Market Share by Application, 2019

22 |
Nano-pesticides are expected to contribute for more than 30% of annual revenue generation in

Europe until the year 2020 (Foster et al. 2017). This is due to the fact that Asia Pacific has the

most arable land and is becoming more and more open to new crop protection technology.

Furthermore, it is expected to grow at a rapid pace throughout the forecast time period

(Hopkinson ET al.2017). A substantial chunk of the market will remain in North America in

2020. Compared to this, the Middle East and Africa is a small market that will likely grow more

slowly over the next several years (Wendorff et al., 2011).     

Global Nano-pesticides Market Share by Region, 2019

There are a number of major companies in the worldwide market for Nano-pesticides, including

as Valent Biosciences, Andermatt Bio control, Marrone Bio Innovations, Camson Bio

Technologies, Stockton, Bayer, and Corteva, engaged. For the most part, businesses are putting

their efforts towards developing new Nano-pesticides. One goal of these firms is to help farmers

avoid overuse of pesticides and efficiently regulate their release into our environment by

promoting Nano-pesticides as a viable alternative (Shvedova et al., 2017).

23 |
Global Nano-pesticides Market, Company Share 2019

Mode of action

As a result, Nano-based formulations are more effective in covering, adhering, and penetrating

insects than conventional pesticide formulations, which have larger particle sizes (Angus et al.

2017). Nano-based formulations have the ability to modify the modes of action and transfer

channels of traditional pesticides by adding insect target modification and enhancing the release

of anti-insecticides into the environment (Cooper et al. 2008). For the purposes of classification,

pesticides can be classified as stomach poisoning, inhalation poisoning, contact poisoning, or

fumigation poisoning, depending on how they enter the pest's system (Danprasert et al. 2003).

Stomach poisoning involves the pesticide entering through its mouth or digestive system, while

inhalation poisoning involves the pesticide entering through the fluids of a consumed host (A

gaseous pesticide is able to penetrate the pest's body via its respiratory system.) (Mattos et al.

2017). For this reason, it was assumed that Nano-based formulations would have improved

stomach and contact poisoning abilities (KumarGupta et al). This would speed up the rate at

which the pesticide is absorbed by pests (Tardy et al. 2017). In addition, increasing the efficiency

of pesticide nanoparticle transport, conduction, and transformation inside pests may speed up

24 |
pest poisoning, increasing the efficacy of pesticides as well as their bioactivity and dose impact

(Maaza et al., 2016);

Figure 8: Nano-formulation's impact on degradation and biosafety is being studied

(Source: Auffan, 2016)

The discharge of nanoparticles into the environment, including plants and aquatic systems, will

be inevitable. For their unique physical and chemical features, nanoparticles may have

unanticipated detrimental consequences on crops, agricultural products, as well as on the

environment in general (Shakil et al. 2017). In addition, these elements will accumulate in soils

over time, and the rate at which they do so may be affected by unknown factors (Kumar et al.

2017). Toxic nanoparticles and nanostructured materials might wind up in the environment and

food chain, endangering human health and ecological harmony, among other things. This is a

serious concern. Farmland, on the other hand, is an open, complex system that is influenced by a

wide range of elements (Prasad et al. 2017). As a consequence, there is a dearth of data on the

concentration of Nano-formulations in various media (Samuelson et al. 2003). Furthermore, the

fate of nanoparticles and the likelihood of a biosafety hazard are unknown, thus the safety and

25 |
risk assessment of Nano-pesticides should be conducted in line with methodologies established

in the fields of Nano-toxicology and Nano-medicine (Parmar et al. 2017). Toxicological effects,

environmental behavior, and pharmacokinetics are all being studied in the realm of

nanoparticles. They're also looking at how nanoparticles and plants interact, and whether or not it

has an effect on the safety and quality of agricultural goods (Dilbaghi et al., 2014).

Stored product insects

A variety of organisms, including insects and rodents, may spread disease to grains and other

household goods kept in cupboards and pantries. "Pantry pests" are what the general public refers

to these incursions as (Loha et al. 2012). Dried, preserved human food, pet food, and bird seed

all have the potential to transmit the infection. Bugs eat and contaminate pantry items, making

them unfit for human consumption. They may also let tainted food to crawl or fly about the

home, contaminating other areas (Wang et al. 2017). Because of this, they become a nuisance to

a large population of individuals (Shvedova et al., 2017).

All vulnerable materials must be thoroughly examined to find any pests and determine the extent

of the infestation (Kumar et al. 2017). These pests of stored products in Missouri are described in

this article, along with advice on how to get rid of the most frequent ones. Beetles, moths, mites,

and psocids are among the most prevalent insects to cause (Shakil et al. 2017).

Flour and grain beetles

As soon as "bran bugs" are found in and around cereal grain products that have been stored for a

lengthy period of time, the infestation starts (Liu et al. 2016). The saw-toothed grain beetle, the

confused flour beetle, and the red flour beetle are the three most prevalent species in agriculture,

however this word may refer to a wide range of insects (Singh ET al.2012).

Saw-toothed grain beetle

26 |
 Figure 9: Grass saw-tooth beetles

(Source: Frederiksen, 2003)

Teeth-like projections on either side of the adult beetle's thorax, just below the head, give this

insect its common name (Yang et al. 2017). This little parasite, which is about a tenth of an inch

long, is thin, flat, and dark red or brown in color (Gopinath et al. 2017). It feeds on a wide range

of foods including grains, flour-based products, dried fruits and vegetables, nuts and seeds, and

even candy. Store-bought products and shopping carts may be used to convey it inside (Zhou et

al., 2014).

The beetle's eggs are laid on or near food, and when they hatch, the larvae resemble grubs in

color and shape. After a long period of consuming, the larvae form clumps of food particles by

gluing them together (Wang et al. 2017). The larvae are shielded from harm by this protective

layer. When they're covered with this layer, they pupate and stop moving. After hatching, they

spend about a week developing into adult beetles. Adults may expect to live for an additional

two to three years after becoming majority age (Shen et al. 2016).

Flour beetle confusion and red flour beetle 

27 |
 Figure 10: Red flour beetle

(Source: Wanyika, 2016)

Reddish brown in color, the confused flour beetle grows to a length of about 1/7 of an inch. Both

the red flour beetle and the confused flour beetle have striking resemblances in appearance and

behavior, making it impossible to distinguish between the two without the help of an expert.

Starchy foods like as processed grains and cereal goods are also eaten by this bug (Al-Malekic

ET al.2017). It also eats legumes, peas, baking powders, dried fruits, and even a variety of

prescription drugs and cayenne pepper (Saravananb et al. 2017).

Because they can live and reproduce in large numbers in a single container of tainted food, these

insects are very deadly. Any food products that are tempting to adults, such as fruits and

vegetables, may be infested by the adults if they are kept in open containers and left unattended

for a prolonged period of time (Rameshd et al. 2016).

During the course of her life cycle, the adult female beetle produces little, sticky eggs (flour,

meal, etc.). Larvae, which are tiny white grubs, eat until they are approximately a sixteenth of an

inch long. Return to the depths and pupate, or transition from their wormlike larval stage into an

immobile adult form, before returning to the depths once again (Greiner et al. 2011). Adults

begin laying eggs as soon as they locate a spouse (Hellmann et al. 2011). When a container is

infested, they either return there or spread to neighboring containers. A whole generation, from

28 |
egg to adult, might be generated under ideal conditions in as little as two months (Bucheli et al.,

2018).

Anobiid beetles

Cigarette beetle

Figure 11: Cigarette beetle

(Source: De Oliveira, 2014)

Smoke beetle and pharmacy bug infestations affect a wide variety of foods. Things that have

been stored may be harmed by adults and larvae. In terms of appearance and behavior, the two

species are quite similar (Iavicoli et al. 2017). Their silky, yellowish brown look is due to their

microscopic "hairs," which give them a length of about 1/10 of an inch. From above, it is

impossible to see that the head is tucked in beneath the body (Leso et al. 2017). A few

millimeters longer than the circumference of their cylindrical bodies are the legs of these

organisms (Beezhold ET al.2017). To differentiate between pharmacy beetles and cigarettes, on

the antenna of the grownups, there is a three-segmented bar. When you look at its wings, you can

see faint lines going down the length of its body. C-shaped and creamy white, save for a yellow

head and brown mouthparts, both species' larvae are the same (Ihegwuagu et al. 2016). "Hair" in

Cigarette Beetle and Pharmacy Bug larvae is vastly different (Sha'Ato et al. 2017).

29 |
Tobacco warehouses are plagued by cigarette beetles, a pest that may cause severe damage to

both stored bundles and processed goods like cigars and chewing tobacco. There are several sites

where cottonseed meal mills, furniture firms, and libraries flourish (Ensikat et al., 2008).

Drugstore beetle

Figure 12: Drugstore beetle

(Source: FAO, 2010)

Drugstore beetles eat a far wider variety of foods than cigarette beetles do. Any dry food may be

attacked by this beetle, and it can even feed on inedible things such as decaying flesh (Tor-

Anyiin et al. 2017). Everything from baked goods to flour to cayenne to spices to prescription

drugs to strychnine has been found to be contaminated with the parasite (Nnamonu et al. 2017).

To mention just a few items this insect has perforated, a whole shelf's worth of books has been

demolished by it. Multiple generations may occur each year provided conditions are favorable,

including enough food and temperatures (Kumar et al., Kim et al., 2019).

Dermestid beetles

Dermestidae beetles include the hide beetle. They are scavengers that feed on a wide variety of

items, including both plant and animal products (Sone et al. 2016). The bulk of the damage is the

fault of the larvae. When they are out in the open, adults are thought to be predominantly feeding

on flower pollen (Kumar et al. 2014). Beetles may grow from 1/8 inch to 1/4 inch in length as

adults. They are little, oval, convex beetles (Bhanjana et al. 2014). Hairy or scale-covered

creatures are prevalent. The color patterns on the hairs and scales of most species may be

30 |
beneficial in identifying them since they have a distinctive color pattern (Sharma et al. 2014). It

is common for larvae to be tubular in shape, brownish in color, and covered with long hairs when

fully developed. It is possible for them to develop to a length of around 1/4 inch. In the last three

or four segments, some species have tufts of specialized hairs, while others have a lengthy

terminal tuft of hairs (Buekes et al. 2017).

Cabinet beetles

Figure 13: Cabinet beetle

(Source: WHO, 2009)

Cereal grain-loving pantry pests like rye and barley may be found in this group. Larvae that are

fuzzy and slow-moving are the most frequent in food that has been affected (Sidhu et al. 2014).

Adults are more likely to be found around a contaminated food item, especially if it is near a

window or a light source (Shi et al. 2012).

Carpet beetles

31 |
 Figure 14: Black carpet beetle

(Source: FAO, 2015)

These beetles like to consume animal-based diet. Larvae may also consume animal-derived

things, animal-based products include anything from carpets and apparel to furniture and other

home goods (Wang et al. 2012). The majority of the time, their inclusion in plant-based meals is

an accident or a deliberate act. This group of insects is dominated by two species of carpet

beetle: the black and the variegated (Guo et al 2012).

Larder beetles

Figure 15: Larder beetle

(Source: Frederiksen, 2003)

Insects such as larder beetles like to consume dried animal products, such as meat and cheese.

Pet food that has been stored often attracts those (Malekbala et al. 2015). Only a small

32 |
percentage of food items generated from plants are accessed by the larval stages (Watari et al.,

2015).

Weevils

Seed weevils

Figure 16: Bean weevil

(Source: Ghormade, 2011)

Bruchidae beetles may cause damage to dried beans and peas that have been preserved. The

cowpea weevil and the bean weevil are the most frequent weevil species in Missouri. Adults

deposit their eggs on the pods' surfaces during breeding and storing. It is the grub-like larvae that

cause the seeds to sprout (Massinon et al. 2013). Adult weevils are little, stout-bodied beetles

with truncated wing coverings that do not cover the tip of the abdomen, measuring about 3/16

inch in length (see illustration). In most species, the body is slender in the front and large

antennae are the norm. Its colour might range from a dull grey to a rich brown, with flecks of

contrasting colour here and there (Rolfe et al. 2014). Windowsills are where adults seek refuge

from hazardous items. The presence of these critters on a windowsill is a sure sign of an

infestation. The length of time it takes for a species and its habitat to mature ranges from three to

10 weeks (Blakey et al. 2014).

Grain weevils

33 |
 Figure 17: Weevil larva on the left, granary weevil in the Centre, and rice weevil on the right

(Source: Morris, 2011)

It is via this snout on the front of their heads that the Curculionidae family of beetles feeds itself.

It is in this huge family that two typical pantry bugs may be found. Both of these insects eat

grains that have been kept for a long time (Saini et al. 2015). Unlike the whitish, legless grublike

larvae, adults eat and grow on the exterior of grain kernels (Zeng et al., 2018).

The granary weevil is chestnut brown to black in color and is about 3/16 of an inch long. It is

unable to fly because there are no working wings under the wing covers. All types of grains are

consumed by both adults and larvae (Bobo et al. 2016). When an egg is laid, the adult female

bores a small hole in the outer shell with her mandibles and then closes the opening with faucal

cement to protect the fertilized egg within (Gopal et al. 2015). The egg hatches, and the larva

develops within the plant's kernel until it emerges as an adult (Gopal et al. 2015). Developing

from an egg to an adult takes around four weeks (Saitoh et al. 2011). It is a little bug with four

light red to yellow spots on the wing covers that is about 1/8 inch in length and is reddish brown

to almost black in color (Saini et al. 2015). For one thing, unlike the granary weevil, this one can

fly thanks to the presence of wings concealed behind the webbing (Yamaguchi et al. 2011). The

granary weevil's biology and behavior, on the other hand, are quite similar (Kumar et al. 2015).

34 |
Spider beetles

Figure 18: Spider beetles of the brown and American varieties are seen here

(Source: Glasgow, U.K 2010)

As a family, the ptinid beetles are known to infest a broad variety of food products, including

frozen ones (Islam et al. 2016). Long legs and a spiderlike appearance separate these bugs from

other beetles. There are both adult and larval forms of the beetle that feed on the polluted

materials they encounter. Under ideal conditions, the time it takes for an egg to mature into an

adult is around three and a half months (Robinson et al. 2016).

Mealworms

Figure 19: Mealworm

(Source: Scott, 2012)

A "mealworm" is a larva of a tenebrionid beetle species; the term "mealworm" is used to

describe these larvae. Mealworms are the largest and most difficult-to-control insects found in

35 |
cereals. Larvae are often found in unopened, out-of-the-way places like basements, where cereal

grains are damp or in poor condition (Thurecht et al. 2016).

Yellow mealworm and dark mealworm

Dark brown to black beetles, yellow mealworms may reach a length of half an inch or more.

Dark mealworms seem like yellow ones, only they're pitch black instead of yellow, and they've

got the same body shape. Both species' full-grown larvae are active and about an inch long.

They're hard to capture because of their tough shell and tubular shape (Bhatnagar et al. 2013).

Yellow mealworm larvae are yellowish brown in color, as opposed to the dark brown of black

mealworm larvae (Hogland et al. 2013). In ideal conditions, the time it takes for an egg to mature

into an adult is around a year. Both species' larval stages are often farmed in big numbers as pet

food at pet supply stores for the convenience of consumers. Pet "food" might be the source of an

infestation if it is taken into the house (Jiang et al., 2012).

Flour moths

Infested grains become home to a kind of moth known as flour moths. According to the USDA,

they're one of the most common pantry pests in Missouri." Adult moths with wingspans of

around 3/4 inch may also be seen flying over damaged areas (Marques et al. 2013). A half-inch-

long caterpillar may cause significant harm to food stored in a refrigerator. Depending on the

species and the surrounding environment, the development of an egg to maturity might take

anywhere from seven to 10 weeks (Castro et al. 2014).

Indian meal moth

36 |
 Figure 20: Indian meal moth

(Source: Werdin, 2016)

In Missouri, cockroaches are the most prevalent pantry pest (Gogos et al. 2014). Adult moth

forewings have distinctive patterns that make them simple to recognize from one another.

Coppery colored wings on the distal two-thirds of the wings and white grey on the base are

around half an inch long (Chen et al. 2015). Only about a half-inch of the wing is visible (Ojeda

et al. 2014). Caterpillars may range in color from dirty white to greenish to pinkish and are about

1/2 inch long. When they crawl, they leave behind a silken thread, which creates webs of

infected food on the surface of the food. To complete their silken cocoons, these larvae must

eventually move on from the polluted item they've been feeding on (De Oliveira, et al. 2014).

Homeowners are more likely to assume an infestation if they see these tiny caterpillars scurrying

over their counters, cabinets, or even the ceilings (Choong et al., 2015).

Mediterranean flour moth

This moth is a little larger than the Indian meal moth. There are many black lines on either side

of its forewings, which are light grey in color (Frederiksen, et al. 2003). The larvae of this

species resemble those of Indian meal moths in both appearance and behavior (Kah et al. 2014).

Grain moths

37 |
Moths that lay their eggs on entire, undamaged grains are often known as "grain moths" because

of the phrase "grain moth. There are multiple species of these moths according to the National

Pest Management Association, but only one is often seen infesting pantry storage places.

Angoumois grain moth

Figure 21: Angoumois moth

(Source: Ziaee, 2014)

With a wingspan of around half an inch, this is a little buff to yellowish moth. They have a

distinctive backwards-pointing profile. The clothes moth is sometimes confused for these moths.

Clothes moths, on the other hand, tend to hide in dark locations like closets and other secluded

areas of the house rather than aggressively flying about. It is common for popcorn to get

contaminated. Popcorn kernels may be topped with eggs both in the field and in storage. Five

weeks is the average amount of time it takes to create a product (Lebeau et al., 2013).

Psocids

38 |
 Figure 22: Grain mites and psocids

(Source: Kettel, 2014)

These small insects, which are the size of a pinhead, may be found in every corner of the planet.

In certain circles, they are referred to as book lice. Stored commodities may be infested by five

different species. These wingless, soft-bodied, and louse-like insects have a light grey or

yellowish white coloration. Their antennas are long and narrow, and their eyes are

underdeveloped. Food products that have been stored in wet conditions are often found to be

infested with them. To classify them as pests, it's mostly because their presence taints the food

they eat. Most species have a gestation period of three weeks or less.

Grain mites

Grain mites are little, soft-bodied, wingless, and light grayish-white creatures. They are often

discovered in grain storage facilities and may thereafter be detected in grain-based foods. They

grow rapidly in moist conditions, resulting in populations that seem to be alive with mites when

infected food is taken in. It takes around two weeks to complete the development phase.

Control

Stored product pest infestations may be prevented and eliminated if proper storage, sanitation,

and follow-up are followed. The risk of infection will be reduced if you follow all of this advice

(Nair et al., Varghese Kumar et al., 2010).

39 |
Prevention

 Make sure to keep an eye out for bugs that may have been brought into your home on

food items while in storage. Bird seed and pet food should be avoided at all costs. You

don't want to buy a lot of these products and let them sitting around for long periods of

time.

 Prevent your house structurally sound to keep pests from the outside from infiltrating.

Caulking around window and doorframes is crucial, as is avoiding gaps under exterior

doors at all costs, in addition to effective screening.

 Storage spaces must be ventilated adequately to avoid the growth of mound and mildew.

Elimination

 Ensure that all susceptible foods are thoroughly inspected for any and all insect

infestations. Make sure to inspect prescription pills, cosmetics, and spices as well as any

inedible items UN your home for pests. Items that have been contaminated should be

removed from the storage area and taken to a trash can for prompt disposal in tightly

sealed bags.

 Heating objects to 130 degrees Fahrenheit for at least 30 minutes may be used to sterilize

them if they are of high value or the infestation is questionable. You can also freeze them

for at least four days. Prescription drugs and cosmetics, both of which may still be used

after the infestation has been eradicated by freezing, may benefit the most from freezing.

Cold and temperature treatments may be used to reduce the number of insects living in

intact grains. Using heat when preparing popcorn is a no-no for obvious reasons. Avoid

heating or freezing seeds if you intend on planting them in the future, since this might

affect germination (Oberdörster et al., 2004).

40 |
  Use a vacuum cleaner and hot soapy water to thoroughly clean the storage area and

shelves.

 In addition to carefully cleaning the storage space, you may wish to apply a modest

insecticide to treat the storage area's cracks and crevices for pests. For pests in the storage

area, check the product's label to see whether it may be used inside. Insecticides based on

parathyroid chemistry are the most often used (active ingredient ending in -thrin). Among

the active ingredients in pyrethroid insecticides include pyrethrin, cyfluthrin, and

cyhalothrin, to name a few. Advantages and disadvantages

 Insecticides have had a positive impact on human health and the lives of millions of

people and domestic animals by protecting crops from defoliation and illness, preventing

significant rotting of stored food, and preventing some diseases, which has saved millions

of lives. An estimated 37% of North America's plant crop potential is lost to pests.

Insecticides may help mitigate some of the harm caused by these pests. Insecticide

spraying is also an important strategy for reducing the number of mosquitoes and other

insects that spread illness to people (such as malaria). Pesticides used to control the

population and hence minimize disease transmission have saved hundreds of millions of

people from death or disability as a consequence of these vectors (Thurecht et al., 2014).

 Insecticide usage may not always lead to better results. Pesticide usage in North America

may be reduced by half without significantly affecting agricultural production, and

significant environmental benefits might be gained by reducing ecological harm. It is

possible that comparable measures may be enacted in North America in the near future

after three European nations (Sweden, Denmark, and the Netherlands) approved laws in

41 |
 the 1990s demanding a minimum 50 percent reduction in agricultural pesticide usage by

the year 2000.

Damages Caused By Insecticide Use

There are substantial benefits to using pesticides, but they are often outweighed by the damage

they do to ecosystems and, in some circumstances, human health. Pesticides kill over 20,000

people each year by poisoning around one million people (mostly insecticides). As a result of

their relatively low use of pesticides, developing countries are responsible for almost half of all

poisonings. Because to inadequate enforcement of standards, widespread illiteracy, and

insufficient use of personal protection equipment and gear, pesticides are widely used in many

poor countries. The most well-known case of pesticide poisoning occurred in the Indian city of

Bhopal in 1984. Around 2,800 people died and another 20,000 were severely poisoned after a

facility released 44 metric tons (40 metric tons) of methyl isocyanine vapors into the atmosphere

by mistake. Carbonate insecticides are manufactured using the chemical precursor methyl

isocyanine.)

As a result, many pesticide treatments cause environmental damage by killing species that are

not meant to be destroyed by the insecticide (that is, organisms that are not pests). When broad-

spectrum insecticides (i.e., those that are harmful to both pests and non-target insects) are

sprayed over a large area, such as an agricultural field or a forest stand, the effects may be

particularly damaging. Many unintended but unavoidable fatalities arise from the insecticide

used in these kinds of wide-scale pesticide spraying campaigns. Spread pesticide spraying, for

example, kills a significant number of arthropods other than the pest species, and birds and

animals may also be poisoned as a consequence. Predators and competitors of the pest species

may be responsible for part of the non-target mortality, enabling the pest to escape some of its

42 |
ecological limitations and causing secondary damage. Some of the most well-known pesticide

damage, including cancer, is produced by DDT and related organ chlorines, such as DDD,

dieldrin, aldrin, and others. These chemicals were originally widely used in North America and

other industrialized countries, but they were banned in the early 1970s owing to environmental

concerns. When DDT was first made in 1874, its insecticidal properties were finally discovered

in 1939. When World War II began, DDT was first employed to control lice infestations by

eliminating mosquitoes, mosquito larvae, and other disease-carrying parasites. Soon after World

War II, DDT was widely used in agricultural, forestry, and malaria control operations when it

was recognized as an unusually potent pesticide. When 385 million pounds (175 million

kilograms) of DDT were manufactured in 1970, it was the peak of the pesticide's production and

use globally. Industrialized nations, on the other hand, began to restrict DDT's usage about this

period. Taking this step was necessitated by the environmental damage that its use was

generating, as well as the possibility that this was causing human ailments. The use of DDT is

still prevalent in developing countries, especially in the tropics, where mosquito-borne diseases

are the primary carriers of disease. These two physical-chemical features have a substantial

influence on the environmental repercussions of DDT and other organ chlorines, including their

high solubility in lipids. Aside from bacteria and physical factors like sunlight and heat,

chlorinated hydrocarbons exist in the environment for lengthy periods of time. In soil, DDT has

an average half-life of around three years. In addition, since DDT and other organ chlorines are

very water-insoluble, they cannot be "diluted" by diluting them with water. Lipophilic substances

are present in abundance in living organisms and are highly soluble in fats or lipids (i.e., they are

lipophilic). The bio-concentration rate of DDT and other organ chlorines is much greater in

living creatures than in their non-living surroundings because organisms are attracted to them

43 |
(Gogoi et al., 2015). As a result, organisms are very adept at absorbing any organ chlorines that

may be present in their food. As a result, top-of-the-food-chain predators have the highest

concentrations of organ chlorine residues, which are particularly concentrated in their fat tissues

(this is known as food-web magnification). Bio-concentration and food-web amplification tend

to increase with age, thus the oldest members of a group are the most contaminated. It is not

uncommon to find substantial amounts of organ chlorine residue on animals that live in close

proximity to areas where these chemicals have been used, such as the United States.

Advantages of the Use of Nano-Pesticides over Conventional Pesticides

Nanotechnology provides a technique for the development of target-specific Nano-pesticides for

pest control formulations that are eco-friendly. The use of targeted Nano-pesticides may increase

pesticide efficacy and minimize pollution and undesired residues in agriculture, as is usually the

case. Pesticide Nano-pesticides have a low release and a long-term protection performance since

they are created utilizing high polymer materials to transport the pesticides. By enhancing

droplet adherence to plant surfaces, these formulations enhance AI of target pesticide molecule

dispersion and bioactivity. For these reasons, Nano-pesticides outperform traditional insecticides

when it comes to controlling agricultural pests. Since Nano-pesticides are so tiny, they are

effective when sprayed onto plants and enhance droplet adherence, they provide both competent

and environmentally friendly benefits. Innovative eco-friendly formulations for pest control may

be developed with the use of nanotechnology, as can target-specific Nano-pesticides. To put it

another way: Target-specific Nano-pesticides have the potential to boost the effectiveness of

pesticides while simultaneously decreasing pollution and undesirable residues in farming. Due to

the high polymer materials used in Nano-pesticides, which may be transported to the target via a

variety of sensitivities such as temperature, light sensitivity, humidity, soil pH, and enzyme

44 |
activity, these pesticides have a long half-life and effective protection. As a consequence of these

formulations, the dispersion and bioactivity of target pesticide chemicals on plant surfaces are

both improved. As a consequence, Nano-pesticides outperform regular pesticides when it comes

to controlling agricultural pests. Nano-pesticides' wettability and rapid absorption by the target,

in addition to their diminutive size, make it easier for droplets to cling to plant surfaces when

used. These are only a few of the benefits of Nano-pesticides, such as their wettability and quick

absorption by the target (Srivastava et al., 2015).

Disadvantages of insecticides

There is a risk that insecticides may kill more species than they are intended to kill, creating a

risk to humans. Aside from that, pesticides may affect aquatic life when they leak into water

sources, drift or discharge. Birds will die if they drink dirty water or diseased insects. As a result

of their harmful effects on predatory birds, several insecticides have been banned in the United

States.

To the point of no longer being affected, insects that have been exposed to pesticides on a regular

basis develop resistance. Depending on the species, insects may create a new generation every

three to four weeks. As a consequence, there is a lot of resistance built up rapidly.

Environmental impact of pesticides

There are several environmental repercussions of pesticides, which are detailed in the

environmental impacts of pesticide section. The unintended effects of pesticide usage are a

significant contributor to modern industrial agriculture's negative impact on the environment.

Using pesticides, which are dangerous molecules that are meant to kill pests, may have negative

consequences on non-target species including plants, animals and humans. Because pesticides

and herbicides are applied or disseminated across large expanses of agricultural land, the great

45 |
majority of them wind up in locations other than their intended target species, according to the

EPA (EPA). In addition to pesticides and herbicides, the use of agrochemicals, such as fertilizers,

may harm the ecosystem.

As a whole, pesticides have a negative impact on the ecosystem and not only in the area where

they are used Using pesticide runoff and pesticide drift, pesticides may reach distant aquatic

ecosystems or nearby farms, grazing pastures, human populations, and underdeveloped regions.

Inefficient production, shipping, storage, and disposal operations cause further problems.

Resistance in insects may be bred via repeated exposure to chemicals while the pest's effects on

other species can make its eradication more challenging. Instead of relying on environmentally

dangerous pesticides, poly-culture and other sustainable agriculture practices such as integrated

pest management lessen these consequences. More than 60 percent of global agricultural land is

"at risk of pesticide contamination by more than one active component," and more than 30

percent is "at high risk," with a third of this acreage being in high-biodiversity zones, according

to environmental modelling. Each pesticide or class of pesticides is related with a specific set of

environmental concerns. As a consequence of their harmful effects, several pesticides have been

prohibited, while others have been regulated or reduced by law. There has been an increase in

pesticide use all across the world, including the use of older/obsolete chemicals that are now

illegal in certain places. Across the globe, pesticide usage has increased during the last several

decades. There is a risk that pesticides will contaminate the ecosystem. Insecticide drift is the

movement of pesticide particles through the air, which may contaminate or even kill other

creatures or people if they reach them. When pesticides are sprayed on crops, they may volatilize

and be blown away by the wind, posing a danger to animals in the surrounding area. The

meteorological conditions at the time of application, as well as the temperature and relative

46 |
humidity levels, impact the dispersion of a pesticide in the air. During high winds, the quantity of

spray that is transported and exposed increases. Due to the combination of low relative humidity

and high temperature, greater spray evaporation occurs. As a consequence, the season frequently

dictates the amount of inhalable pesticides present in the surrounding environment. Pesticides

may also be transported by the wind in the form of sprayed droplets or dust particles, or

pesticides can adhere to and be carried by wind-borne particles, such as dust particles. When

pesticides are administered from the ground rather than the air, they have less chance of drifting.

Farmers may use non-crop vegetation such as evergreen trees as windbreaks and pesticide

absorbers to establish a pesticide buffer zone around their crop to prevent pesticide drift into

adjacent regions. Windbreaks of this kind are required by legislation in the Netherlands. This

study is focused mostly on the development of new formulations and the comparison of these

formulations to commercially available pesticides. The fate of Nano-pesticides in the

environment has been the subject of just a few research. It's possible that Nano-pesticide

formulations have a positive impact on the environment and human health, but this should be

properly explored before widespread use. Nano-carrier interactions and effects on soil bacteria,

pollinators, beneficial insects, and other non-targeted species should be thoroughly investigated

in the agro ecosystem (de Oliveira et al., 2014). According to conventional wisdom, the

solubility of pesticides plays a crucial role in their transport, bioavailability, and degradation.

Increases in solubility of the AI may lead to enhanced mobility and a faster degradation by soil

bacteria. In addition, surfactants may have an effect on the insecticide AI's physicochemical

properties and environmental fate. Surfactant-modified carriers, such as avermectin, which has a

high absorption rate in soil, may make the drug more mobile. The development of sticky Nano-

pesticides is motivated by lower treatment rates as a consequence of reduced pesticide losses

47 |
owing to rolling off, leaching, and degradation. However, in certain instances, pesticides with

strong adhesive properties and long-lasting persistence might be a liability. An increase in

operator interaction and a buildup of residue in the immediate area may both be caused by the

adhesive composition itself. Pesticide resistance and disease resistance may rise as a result of

long-term pesticide use, as well as detrimental effects on non-target species. It's need to conduct

further experiments in real-world conditions to evaluate whether or not these effects will have a

significant influence on the transport and degradation of a specific pesticide.

A pollutant known as ground level ozone is created when insecticides sprayed on fields or used

to fumigate soil release components known as volatile organic compounds. In all, the EPA

estimates that pesticides are responsible for around 6% of the ground-level ozone that we

breathe.

Water

Figure 23: Pesticide pathways

(Source: Hellman, 2011)

Pesticides were found in every stream and more than 90% of the wells investigated by the United

States Geological Survey when they performed a study. Rainwater and groundwater have also

been shown to contain pesticide residues. Pesticide concentrations in several samples of river

48 |
water and groundwater in the United Kingdom surpassed the threshold deemed acceptable for

drinking water, according to official studies.

In aquatic systems, pesticide impacts are commonly studied using a hydrological transport

model, which is used to study the flow and fate of chemicals in streams and rivers. When

pesticide runoff was first quantified in the early twentieth century, scientists could predict how

much pesticide will reach surface waters in the future.

Pesticides may get into water in a variety of ways, including drifting when sprayed, percolating

or leaching through the soil, being carried by precipitation, and eventually being spilled

accidentally or carelessly. Crushed dirt may also carry them to water. Water pollution may be

caused by pesticides in a variety of ways. These include: pesticide solubility in water; distance

from application site to body of water; weather; soil type; presence of growing crop; and

pesticide application method (Hiraide et al., 2011).

Rules that are primarily concerned with water

In accordance with federal rules and standards, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) sets

maximum amounts of certain pesticides in drinking water for public water systems in the United

States. Private Wells, for example, are not subject to federal regulations. State environmental

agencies and the Environmental Protection Agency work together to set pesticide dosage limits

for ambient water quality (EPA). In certain cases, these standards may be imposed for a single

water body or for the whole state.

To develop Environmental Quality Standards (EQS), the maximum allowable amounts of certain

pesticides in water bodies that might cause harm if exceeded, the United Kingdom is responsible.

EU regulations set limit values for pesticide concentrations in water.

Soil

49 |
An overuse or misuse of pesticides in agricultural production may have an adverse effect on the

population of soil microorganisms and may lead to deterioration and damage to the soil's micro

biota. Pesticides' effects on soil microorganisms and biochemical processes remain a mystery,

despite countless investigations. Although pesticide residues may be destroyed and absorbed by

soil microorganisms and biochemical processes, certain studies have shown that pesticides have

deleterious impacts on soil microorganisms and biochemical processes. Pesticides' effects on soil

microorganisms are influenced by their duration, concentration, and toxicity, as well as by a

variety of other environmental factors. Toxicology of the pesticides used and other

environmental variables are taken into consideration. Because of the difficulties in drawing clear

conclusions on pesticide interactions with soil ecosystems owing to this complex interplay of

factors, it is difficult to draw decisive results. The metabolic mechanisms that contribute to the

nutrition cycle may be disrupted by long-term pesticide use.

Pesticides include a large number of long-lasting soil contaminants, meaning their effects may

linger for decades and undermine attempts to conserve soil.

Soil biodiversity is negatively impacted by the use of pesticides. Due to the higher levels of

organic matter in the soil resulting from less chemical inputs, organic farming improves soil

quality while also enhancing water retention. In drought years when organic farms have

generated 20-40 percent more yields than conventional farms, producers may increase their

yields by using this information to their advantage. A lesser amount of organic matter in the soil

increases the amount of pesticide that may exit the region after application because organic

matter clings to pesticides and assists in their breakdown (Beattie et al., Marcell, et al., 2002).

Degradation and sorption are two processes that have an effect on pesticide persistence in soil. It

is possible that these actions have a direct effect on pesticide transportation from soil to water,

50 |
and then to the air and our food supply depending on the pesticide's chemical makeup. In soil

microbes interact to decompose organic compounds, which is a complicated process that takes

place over time. Pesticides that rely on organic matter in the soil are less likely to build as a

consequence of sorption. Due to the soil's pH and mostly acidic composition, strong organic

acids have been shown to be poorly absorbed by it. Microbes have been shown to be less able to

access chemicals that have been sorbet. Even though soil ageing mechanisms are poorly

understood, it is known that pesticide residues become more difficult to break down and remove

as their biological activity decreases.

Impact on living beings

Plants

Crop spraying

Soil pesticides impede nitrogen fixation, a process essential for better plant growth and

reproduction. Pesticides like DDT, methyl parathion, and pentachlorophenol, among others, have

been demonstrated to interfere with the chemical communication between legumes and

rhizobium in laboratory experiments. Crop yields are diminished as a consequence of a reduction

in the symbiotic chemical communication between plants. The global economy saves over $10

billion in synthetic nitrogen fertilizer each year due to the formation of root nodules in these

plants.

However, pesticides have direct harmful impacts on plants, including poor root hair production,

yellowing of the shoots, and decreased plant growth.

Pollinators

One of the main causes of pollinator decline is the use of pesticides that may damage bees. The

rapid departure of worker bees from a beehive or a western honey bee colony is particularly

51 |
problematic in cases of Colony Collapse Disorder. Pesticides may kill honeybees, an essential

pollinator of crops, if they are administered to them when they are in flower. Since pesticides

sprayed on fields kill roughly a fifth of honeybee colonies and damage an additional 15 percent

of honeybee colonies, US farmers lose at least $200 million each year due to decreased

agricultural pollination, according to the USDA and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Corrie et al.,

2016).

Animals

Many common chaffinches have gone extinct as a direct consequence of pesticide overuse in

English gardens and farmland.

In order to safeguard the environment, several countries have implemented Biodiversity Action

Plans to limit the use of pesticides.

This may happen when animals, such as wild animals, enter sprayed fields or nearby areas

shortly after spraying, eating food that has pesticide residues on it.

Pesticides may deplete an animal's food supply, causing it to flee, change its diet, or perish

altogether. When birds consume insects and worms that have ingested pesticides, they may be

harmed by the residues that have travelled up the food chain. Organic matter is broken down by

earthworms, which increases the quantity of nutrients in the soil's top layer that are accessible to

plants. Bio indicators of soil activity are a benefit to human health, as are animals that consume

decomposed trash. Pesticides have been demonstrated to have detrimental effects on the growth

and reproduction of earthworms, according to research. A number of pesticides are capable of

bioaccumulation, which means they may build up to harmful concentrations in the bodies of

organisms that consume them. Species near the top of the food chain are especially affected by

this phenomenon (Sillanpää et al., 2013).

52 |
Birds

Index of number of common farmland birds in the European Union and selected European

countries, base equal to 100 in 1990.

 Swede

 Netherlands

 France

 United Kingdom

 European Union

 Germany

 Switzerland

In the United States, the US Fish and Wildlife Service estimates that pesticides kill 72 million

birds each year (USFWS). No target species, such as bald eagles, are well-known examples of

pesticides' harmful impact. During her investigation into the danger pesticides cause to birds,

Rachel Carson wrote about pesticide bioaccumulation in her book Silent Spring. Pesticides are

still causing harm to birds, according to current evidence. 10 million breeding individuals of 10

separate bird species are estimated to have died on the United Kingdom's farmland between 1979

and 1999 owing to the loss of plant and invertebrate species that the birds eat. According to the

53 |
IUCN, 116 bird species in Europe were considered endangered or vulnerable as recently as 1999.

Using pesticides at certain times and in specific locations has been linked to a drop in bird

numbers. As a consequence of eggshell thinning caused by DDE, bird populations in Europe and

North America have plummeted. There has been a decline in the number of common farmland

birds throughout the European Union, France, Belgium and Sweden; in Germany, which relies

more on organic farming and fewer pesticides, the decline has been slower; and in Switzerland,

which does not rely on intensive agriculture, the number of common farmland birds has

rebounded to levels similar to 1990 following a decline in the early 2000s. Other forms of

fungicides used in peanut cultivation do minor damage to birds and animals, but they also kill

earthworms, reducing the quantity of animals and birds that eat those earthworms as food.

Grain-based pesticides are offered for certain pest control applications. The granules may be

mistaken for food by wildlife, who would then eat them. Small amounts of pesticide might cause

even the most fragile birds to be poisoned. Herbicides have the potential to put bird populations

at risk by reducing the amount of habitat that they have access to (Cirelli et al., 2014).

Humans

Ingestion of pesticide-containing aerosols, dust, or vapor, inhalation of pesticide-containing food

or drink, oral exposure, or direct skin contact are all possible methods by which toxins might

enter the body. Environmental poisoning is possible due to pesticides leaching into soils or

groundwater, which may end up in drinking water, as well as pesticide spray that floats in the air

and is damaging to wildlife.

Toxicities of pesticides, as well as exposure duration and quantity, have a major effect on human

health. The most prevalent way of exposure for farm workers and their families is via direct

54 |
contact with agricultural chemicals. Insecticides are found in the fat cells of every human

(Bucheli et al., 2018).

Toxic pesticides are particularly dangerous to youngsters since they are still developing and have

a lower immune system than adults. As a result of their proximity to the ground and tendency for

ingesting unexpected things, children may be more exposed than adults to potential harm. The

amount of hand-to-mouth contact a child has changes with age similarly to lead exposure.

Asbestos is more likely to reach young infants via breast milk or inhalation of small particles if

they are breastfed. Family members who bring pesticides inside the home increase the risk of

exposure. A child's exposure to hazardous residue in food may be amplified under specific

circumstances. The substances may accumulate in the body over time.

Exposure may cause skin irritation, birth defects, malignancies, genetic abnormalities, blood and

nerve illnesses, endocrine disturbance, unconsciousness, and death. Pesticides have been

connected in the past to adverse effects on human development. The recent increase in North

American adolescent malignancies, such as leukemia, may be due to somatic cell mutations.

Insecticides may have a deleterious effect on the nervous systems of animals if they are used to

disrupt insects. Acute and chronic effects of exposure have been documented. DDT has been

related to breast cancer in certain instances because it disrupts estrogenic function. A smaller

penis and/or undescended testes have been seen in male animals exposed to DDT during

gestation. Pesticide exposure may affect an unborn child at any stage of development, even if the

mother or father has been exposed to a pesticide prior to conception. Both chemical reactivity

and structural modifications may lead to genetic disruption, and both are plausible (Jensen

Sumerlin et al., 2015).

55 |
Future Perspectives

As a result, existing regulations are only valid for synthetic pesticides used in the control of

agricultural pests, which is not relevant for analyzing their potential environmental impact.

Developing criteria for the usage of Nano-pesticides is required since Nano-formulations have a

wide variety of properties. For Nano-pesticides, the risk assessment framework must be properly

completed, as in the case of synthetic pesticides, commercial tests may not be appropriate.

Synthetic pesticides, for example, may not be relevant to Nano-pesticides if bulk manufacturing

techniques are employed. Further research into the cost-benefit ratio, price, and acceptance by

large and small-scale farmers, safety and simplicity of application processes, availability, and

other factors should lead to the use of Nano-pesticides for agricultural pest management.

Agricultural pests may be better controlled using pesticide/bio pesticide formulations based on

Nano-based formulations (Nanocides, Nano-emulsions, and nanoparticles), according to

researchers. Instead, this breakthrough will be rigorously scrutinized by national and

international safety authorities because to the probable toxicity risks associated with Nano-

pesticides, which are not commonly recognized, not standardized, and not properly studied.

Chemical synthesis may alter the shape and size of materials, and this poses a variety of risks

when they are used. As a consequence, the synthesis of Nano-materials is of paramount

importance. The use of these formulations on nanoparticles necessitates risk assessment studies

since there are no established guidelines. A study of the chemicals' insect and plant toxicity must

also be conducted before they may be employed on the aforementioned materials. Prior to the

widespread usage of Nano -pesticides in agricultural pest control, more research is necessary.

Analysis of the surface, detection of pests, and quantification of adjuvants and active compounds

emitted from formulations should be combined in this study.

56 |
Nanotechnology may be able to increase the efficacy of pesticides while simultaneously reducing

the harmful effects of pesticides on the environment and on human health in the agricultural

sector. For now, it seems that there is insufficient data to make an informed judgment on the

risks associated with Nano-pesticide usage, despite some remarkable developments. For Nano -

pesticides to be used safely and be accepted by society, a thorough risk evaluation is necessary.

Allowing quantifiable prediction will allow for evidence-based regulation of particular threats.

The growth of sustainable agriculture necessitates a greater investment in Nano-pesticide

research and development (Pedersen et al., 2003).

Conclusion

There is little doubt that Nano-based pesticide formulations outperform their conventional

equivalents in terms of effectiveness, environmental friendliness, targeted delivery, and

intelligent control of release. The use of Nano-pesticides on a large scale in agricultural

production has only recently become conceivable because to recent technological advancements

(Fraceto et al., 2014).

Solubility, dispersion, and stability of traditional pesticides, as well as targeted distribution and

controlled release of active ingredients, are all improved using Nano-based pesticide

formulations (AIs). No target animals, food, and environmental residues may all be less harmful

as a result of the drug's exposure because to its increased bioavailability and extended duration of

action. Nanoparticles released by pesticides into the environment and food chains may pose a

threat to human health and the stability of the ecosystem. It is imperative that Nano-pesticide

safety and risk assessment research follow the methods used in Nano-toxicology and Nano-

medicine to minimize any unintended consequences. Making less harmful and biodegradable

Nano-materials for Nano-pesticides is a need. In addition to reducing water pollution and

57 |
residual contamination of food products, these novel agrochemical products, which represent one

of the most promising and attractive fields of nanotechnology application in agriculture are

expected to improve soil and environmental quality, among other things. With their formulation

and delivery advantages, Nano-pesticides for plant protection provide new ways for creating

active compounds in Nano-scale dimensions and new tactics for increasing the effectiveness of

current pesticides. Future pesticide/bio-pesticide formulations might be improved by using

Nano-pesticide-based formulations, such as Nano-dispersions, Nano-emulsions, and

nanoparticles (Erdely, et al., 2016).

Nano-based pesticide formulations increase the solubility, dispersion, and stability of

conventional pesticides, as well as the targeted distribution and controlled release of active

components (AIs). Because of the drug's improved bioavailability and prolonged duration of

action, no target animals, food, or environmental residues may all be less dangerous as a

consequence of its exposure. It is possible that pesticide-derived nanoparticles might endanger

human health and the ecology as a whole. The procedures employed in Nano-toxicology and

Nano-medicine must be followed to the letter in Nano-pesticide safety and risk assessment

studies. Nano-materials for Nano-pesticides need to be less toxic and biodegradable. They are

also projected to enhance the quality of soil and the environment as a result of these

revolutionary agrochemical products, which constitute one of agriculture's most promising and

appealing domains of nanotechnology application (Fernander-Perez, et al., 2005).

58 |
References

[1] Ghormade, V., Deshpande, M.V., Paknikar, K.M., 2011. Perspectives for nano-

biotechnology enabled protection and nutrition of plants. Biotechnol. Adv. 29, 792-803.

[2] Godfray, H.C.J., Garnett, T., 2014. Food security and sustainable intensification. Philos.

T. Roy. Soc. B. 369, 20120273.

[3] Gogos, A., Knauer, K., Bucheli, T., 2012. Nanomaterials in plant protection and

fertilization: Current state, foreseen applications, and research priorities. J. Agric. Food

Chem. 60, 9781-9792.

[4] Gottschalk, F., Sun, T.Y., Nowack, B., 2013. nvironmental concentrations of engineered

nanomaterials: Review of modeling and analytical studies. Environ. Pollut. 181, 287-300.

[5] Hayles, J., Johnson, L., Worthley, C., Losic, D., 2017. Nanopesticides: A review of

current research and perspectives. New Pesticides and Soil Sensors. Elsevier:

Amsterdam, Netherlands, pp 193-225.

[6] Ihsan, M., Mahmood, A., Mian, M.A., Cheema, N.M., 2007. Effect of different methods

of fertilizer application to wheat after germination under rainfed conditions. J. Agric. Res.

45, 277-281.

[7] Jia, X., Sheng, W. B., Li, W., Tong, Y. B., Liu, Z. Y., Zhou, F., 2014. Adhesive

polydopamine coated avermectin microcapsules for prolonging foliar pesticide retention.

ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces. 6,19552.

[8] Li, B., Tang, L., Qiu, Y., Wang, Y., 2009. Uncommon melt rheological behavior of

hyperbranched polymers bearing quadruple hydrogen bonding units. Gaofenzi Xuebao. 9,

581-585.

59 |
 [9] Li, D., Liu, B., Yang, F., Wang, X., Shen, H., Wu, D., 2016. Preparation of uniform

starch microcapsules by premix membrane emulsion for controlled release of avermectin.

Carbohydr. Polym. 136, 341-349.

[10] Xie, S., Wang, S., Zhao, B., Han, C., Wang, M., Zhou, W., 2008. Effect of PLGA as a

polymeric emulsifier on preparation of hydrophilic protein-loaded solid lipid

nanoparticles. Colloids Surf. B. 67, 199-204.

[11] Yang, D., Cui, B., Wang, C., Zhao, X., Zeng, Z., Wang, Y., Sun, C., Liu, G., Cui, H.,

2017. Preparation and Characterization of Emamectin Benzoate Solid Nanodispersion. J.

Nanomater. 2017, 6560780.

[12] Yu, M., Yao, J., Liang, J., Zeng, Z., Cui, B., Zhao, X., Sun, C., Wang, Y., Liu, G., Cui,

H., 2017. Development of functionalized abamectin poly (lactic acid) nanoparticles with

regulatable adhesion to enhance foliar retention. RSC Adv. 7, 11271-11280.

[13] Zhang, H., Wang, D., Butler, R., Campbell, N.L., Long, J., Tan, B., Duncalf, D.J., Foster,

A.J., Hopkinson, A., Taylor, D., Angus, D., Cooper, A.I., Rannard, S.P., 2008. Formation

and enhanced biocidal activity of water-dispersable organic nanoparticles. Nat.

Nanotechnol. 3, 506-511.

[14] Zhao, X., Cui, H., Chen, W., Wang, Y., Cui, B., Sun, C., Meng, Z., Liu, G., 2014.

Morphology, structure and function characterization of PEI modified magnetic

nanoparticles gene delivery system. PLoS One. 9, e98919.

[15] Chhipa, H., 2017a. Nanofertilizers and nanopesticides for agriculture. Environ. Chem.

Lett. 15, 15-22. Chhipa, H., 2017b. Nanopesticide: Current status and future possibilities.

Agricu. Res. Technol. Open Access J. 5, 555651

60 |
 [16] D’souza, A.A., Shegokar, R., 2016. Polyethylene glycol (PEG): a versatile polymer for

pharmaceutical applications. Expert Opin. Drug Del. 13, 1257-1275.

[17] Danprasert, K., Kumar, R., H-Cheng, M., Gupta, P., Shakil, N.A., Prasad, A.K., Parmar,

V.S., Kumar, J., Samuelson, L.A., Watterson, A.C., 2003. Synthesis of novel poly

(ethylene glycol) based amphiphilic polymers. Eur. Polym. J. 39, 1983-1990.

[18] Dash, T.K., Konkimalla, V.B., 2012. Poly-є-caprolactone based formulations for drug

delivery and tissue engineering: A review. J. Control. Release. 158, 15-33.

[19] De Oliveira J.L., Campos, E.V., Bakshi, M., Abhilash, P.C., Fraceto, L.F., 2014.

Application of nanotechnology for the encapsulation of botanical insecticides for

sustainable agriculture: Prospects and promises. Biotechnol. Adv. 32, 1550-1561.

[20] Dos Santos, A.J., Oliveira Dalla Valentina, L.V., Hidalgo Schulz, A.A., Tomaz Duarte,

M.A., 2017. From obtaining to degradation of PHB: material properties. Part I. Ing.

Cienc. 13, 269-298.

[21] FOCUS. Final report of the work of the soil modelling work group of FOCUS (FOrum

for the Co-ordination of pesticide fate models and their Use). Soil persistence models and

EU registration SANCO_7617_VI_96. 1997 (http://esdac.jrc.ec.europa.eu/projects/

focus-dg-sante) (accessed February 26, 2016). FOCUS. Generic guidance for tier 1

FOCUS ground water assessments version 2.1 (FOrum for the Co-ordination of pesticide

fate models and their Use); 2012 (http://esdac.jrc.ec.europa.eu/ projects/focus-dg-sante)

(accessed February 26, 2016).

[22] Giongo, A.M.M., Vendramim, J.D., Forim, M.R., 2016. Evaluation of neem-based

nanoformulations as alternative to control fall armyworm. Ciênc. Agrotec. 40, 26-36.

61 |
 [23] Gopinath, V., Saravananb, S., Al-Malekic, A.R., Rameshd, M., Vadivelu, J., 2018. A

review of natural polysaccharides for drug delivery applications: Special focus on

cellulose, starch and glycogen. Biomed. Pharmacother. 107, 96-108.

[24] Hellmann, C., Greiner, A., Wendorff, J.H., 2011. Design of pheromone releasing

nanofibers for plant protection. Polym. Advan. Technol. 22, 407-413.

[25] Iavicoli, I., Leso, V., Beezhold, D.H., Shvedova, A.A., 2017. Nanotechnology in

agriculture: Opportunities, toxicological implications, and occupational risks. Toxicol.

Appl. Pharmacol. 329, 96-111.

[26] Ihegwuagu, N.E., Sha'Ato, R., Tor-Anyiin, T.A., Nnamonu, L.A., Buekes, P., Sone, B.,

Maaza, M., 2016. Facile formulation of starch-silver-nanoparticle encapsulated

dichlorvos and chlorpyrifos for enhanced insecticide delivery. New J. Chem. 40, 1777-

1784.

[27] Kumar, S., Bhanjana, G., Sharma, A., Sidhu, M.C., Dilbaghi, N., 2014. Synthesis,

characterization and on field evaluation of pesticide loaded sodium alginate

nanoparticles. Carbohyd. Polym. 101, 1061-1067.

[28] Liu, B., Wang, Y., Yang, F., Wang, X., Shen, H., Cui, H., and Wu, D., 2016.

Construction of a controlled-release delivery system for pesticides using biodegradable

PLA-based microcapsules. Colloid. Surf. B Biointerfaces. 144, 38-45.

[29] Loha, K.M., Shakil, N.A., Kumar, J., Singh, M.K., Srivastava, C., 2012. Bio-efficacy

evaluation of nanoformulations of β-cyfluthrin against Callosobruchus maculatus

(Coleoptera: Bruchidae). J. Environ. Sci. Health B. 47, 687-691.

62 |
 [30] Mattos, B.D., Tardy, B.L., Magalhaes, W.L.E., Rojas, O.J., 2017. Controlled release for

crop and wood protection: Recent progress toward sustainable and safe nanostructured

biocidal systems. J. Control. Release. 262,139-50.

[31] Memarizadeh, N., Ghadamyari, M., Adeli, M., Talebi, K., 2014. Preparation,

characterization and efficiency of nanoencapsulated imidacloprid under laboratory

conditions. Ecotoxicol. Environ. Safe. 107, 77-83.

[32] Ojha, S., Sigh, D., Sett, A., Chetia, H., Kabiraj, D., Bora, U., 2018. Nanotechnology in

crop protection. In: Tripathi, D.K. eds. Nanomaterials in Plants, Algae, and

Microorganisms. Academic Press, 345-391.

[33] Pascoli, M., Lopes-Oliveira, P.J., Fraceto, L.F., Seabra, A.B. Oliveira, H.C., 2018. State

of the art of polymeric nanoparticles as carrier systems with agricultural applications: a

minireview. Energ. Ecol. Environ. 3, 137-148.

[34] Peters, R.J.B., Bouwmeester, H., Gottardo, S., Amenta, V., Arena, M., Brandhoff, P.,

Marvin, H.J.P., Mech, A., Moniz, F.B., Pesudo, L.Q., Rauscher, H., Schoonjans, R.,

Undas, A. K., Vettori, M.V., Weigel, S., Aschberger, K., 2016. Nanomaterials for

products and application in agriculture, feed and food. Trends Food Sci. Technol. 54,

155-164.

[35] Petosa, A.R., Rajput, F., Selvam, O., Ohl, C., Tufenkji, N., 2017. Assessing the transport

potential of polymeric nanocapsules developed for crop protection. Water Res. 111, 10-

17.

[36] Beattie, G.A., Marcell, L.M., 2002. Effect of alterations in cuticular wax biosynthesis on

the physicochemical properties and topography of maize leaf surfaces. Plant Cell.

Environ. 25:1-16.

63 |
 [37] Bhatnagar, A., Hogland, W., Marques, M., Sillanpää, M., 2013. An overview of the

modification methods of activated carbon for its water treatment applications Chem. Eng.

J. 219, 499-511.

[38] Bobo, D., Robinson, K.J., Islam, J., Thurecht, K.J., Corrie, S.R., 2016. Nanoparticle-

based medicines: A review of FDA-approved materials and clinical trials to date. Pharm.

Res. 33, 2373-2387.

[39] Bryleva, E.Y., Vodolazkaya, N.A., Mchedlov-Petrossyan, N.O., Samokhina, L.V.,

Matveevskaya, N.A., 2006. The properties of silica nanoparticles modified with cationic

surfactant. Funct Mater.13, 662-668.

[40] Castro, M. J. L., Ojeda, C., Cirelli, A.F., 2014. Advances in surfactants for

agrochemicals. Environ. Chem. Lett. 12, 85-95.

[41] Chen, M., Jensen S. P., Hill, M.R., Moore, G., He, Z., Sumerlin, B.S., 2015. Synthesis of

amphiphilic polysuccinimide star copolymers for responsive delivery in plants. Chem.

Commun. 51, 9694-9697.

[42] Cui, B., Wang, C., Zhao, X., Yao, J., Zeng, Z., Wang, Y., Sun, C., Liu, G., Cui, H., 2018.

Characterization and evaluation of avermectin solid nanodispersion prepared by

microprecipitation and lyophilization techniques. PLoS ONE. 13, e0191742.

[43] Dawson, K.A., Salvati, A., Lynch, I., 2009. Nanotoxicology: nanoparticles reconstruct

lipids. Nat. Nanotechnol. 4, 84-85.

[44] De Oliveira, J. L., Campos, E.V., Bakshi, M., Abhilash, P.C., Fraceto, L.F., 2014.

Application of nanotechnology for the encapsulation of botanical insecticides for

sustainable agriculture: prospects and promises. Biotechnol. Adv. 32, 1550-1561.

64 |
 [45] Ding, G., Li, D., Liu, Y., Guo, M., Duan, Y., Li, J., Cao, Y., 2014. Preparation and

characterization of kasuga-silica-conjugated nanospheres for sustained antimicrobial

activity. J. Nanopart. Res. 16, 2671.

[46] Erdely, A., Dahm, M.M., Schubauer-Berigan, M.K., Chen, B.T., Antonini, J.M., Hoover,

M.D., 2016. Bridging the gap between exposure assessment and inhalation toxicology:

Some insights from the carbon nanotube experience. J. Aerosol. Sci. 99, 157-162.

[47] Fernander-Perez, M., Villafranca-Sanchez, M., Flores-Cespedes, F.,

[48] Garrido-Herrera, F. J., Perez-Garcia, S., 2005. Use of bentonite and activated carbon in

controlled release formulations of carbofuran. J. Agric. Food Chem. 53, 6697-6703.

[49] Frederiksen, H.K., Kristenson, H.G., Pedersen, M., 2003. Solid lipid microparticle

formulations of the pyrethroid gamma-cyhalothrin-incompatibility of the lipid and the

pyrethroid and biological properties of the formulations. J. Control. Release. 86, 243-252.

[50] Garrido-Herrera, F. J., Gonzalez-Pradas, E., Fernander-Perez, M., 2006. Controlled

release of isoproturon, imidacloprid, and cyromazine from alginate−bentonite-activated

carbon formulations. J. Agric. Food Chem. 54, 10053-10060.

[51] Grabowski, N., Hillaireau, H., Vergnaud, J., Tsapis, N., Pallardy, M., Kerdine-Röme, S.,

Fattal, E., 2015. Surface coating mediates the toxicity of polymeric nanoparticles towards

human-like macrophages. Int. J. Pharmseut. 482, 75-83.

[52] Guhling, O., Kinzler, C., Dreyer, M., Bringmann, G., Jetter, R., 2005. Surface

composition of myrmecophilic plants: cuticular wax and glandular trichomes on leaves of

Macaranga tanarius. Chem. Ecol. 31,2323-2341.

65 |
 [53] Huang, B., Chen, F., Shen, Y., Qian, K., Wang, Y., Sun, C., Zhao, X., Cui, B., Gao, F.,

Zeng, Z., Cui, H., 2018. Advances in targeted pesticides with environmentally responsive

controlled release by nanotechnology. Nanomaterials. 8, 102.

[54] Iavicoli, I., Leso, V., Beezhold, D.H., Shvedova, A.A., 2017. Nanotechnology in

agriculture: Opportunities, toxicological implications, and occupational risks. Toxicol.

Appl. Pharmacol. 329, 96-111.

[55] Jia, X., Sheng, W.B., Li, W., Tong, Y.B., Liu, Z.Y., Zhou, F., 2014. Adhesive

polydopamine coated avermectin microcapsules for prolonging foliar pesticide retention.

ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces. 6, 19552-19558.

[56] Kah, M., Kookana, R.S., Gogos, A., Bucheli, T.D., 2018. A critical evaluation of

nanopesticides and nanofertilizers against their conventional analogues. Nat.

Nanotechnol. 13, 677-684.

[57] Koch, K., Ensikat, H.J., 2008. The hydrophobic coatings of plant surfaces: epicuticular

wax crystals and their morphologies, crystallinity and molecular self-assembly. Micron.

39,759-772.

[58] Kumar, S., Nehra, M., Dilbaghi, N., Marrazza, G., Hassan, A.A., Kim, K.H., 2019. Nano-

based smart pesticide formulations: Emerging opportunities for agriculture. J Control.

Release. 294, 131-153.

[59] Li, X., Liu, W., Sun, L., Aifantis, K.E., Yu, B., Fan, Y., Feng, Q., Cui, F., Watari, F.,

2015. Effects of physicochemical properties of nanomaterials on their toxicity. J.

[60] Biomed. Mater. Res. A. 103, 2499-2507.

66 |
 [61] Liang, J., Yu, M., Guo, L., Cui, B., Zhao, X., Sun, C., Wang, Y., Liu, G., Cui, H., Zeng,

Z., 2018. Bioinspired development of P(St−MAA)−Avermectin nanoparticles with high

affinity for foliage to enhance folia retention. J. Agric. Food Chem. 66, 6578-6584.

[62] Liu, Q., Shi, J., Wang, T., Guo, F., Liu, L., Jiang, G., 2012. Hemimicelles/admicelles

supported on magnetic graphene sheets for enhanced magnetic solid-phase extraction. J.

Chromatogr. A. 1257, 1-8.

[63] Malekbala, M.R., Khan, M.A., Hosseini, S., Abdullah, L.C., Choong T.S.Y., 2015.

Adsorption/desorption of cationic dye on surfactant modified mesoporous carbon coated

monolith: Equilibrium, kinetic and thermodynamic studies. J. Ind. Eng. Chem. 21, 369-

377.

[64] Massinon, M., Lebeau, F., 2013. Review of physicochemical processes involved in

agrochemical spray retention. Biotechnol. Agron. Soc. Environ. 17, 494-504.

[65] Nair, R., Varghese, S.H., Nair, B.G., Maekawa, T., Yoshida, Y., Kumar, D.S., 2010.

Nanoparticulate material delivery to plants. Plant Sci. 179, 154-163.

[66] Oberdörster, G., Sharp, Z., Atudorei, V., Elder, A., Gelein, R., Kreyling, W., Cox,

[67] C., 2004. Translocation of inhaled ultrafine particles to the brain. Inhal. Toxicol. 16, 437-

445,

[68] Rolfe, B.E., Blakey, I., Squires, O., Peng, H., Boase, N.R.B., Alexander, C., Parsons,

P.G., Boyle, G.M., Whittaker, A.K., Thurecht, K.J., 2014. Multimodal polymer

nanoparticles with combined F-19 magnetic resonance and optical detection for tunable,

targeted, multimodal imaging in vivo. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 136, 2413-2419.

67 |
 [69] Saini, P., Gopal, M., Kumar, R., Gogoi, R., 2015b. Residue, dissipation, and safety

evaluation of pyridalyl nanoformulation in Okra (Abelmoschus esculentus [L] Moench).

Environ. Monit. Assess. 187, 123.

[70] Saini, P., Gopal, M., Kumar, R., Gogoi, R., Srivastava, C., 2015a. Bioefficacy evaluation

and dissipation pattern of nanoformulation versus commercial formulation of pyridalyl in

tomato (Solanum lycopersicum). Environ. Monit. Assess. 187, 541.

[71] Saitoh, T., Yamaguchi, M., Hiraide, M., 2011. Surfactant-coated aluminum hydroxide for

the rapid removal and biodegradation of hydrophobic organic pollutants in water. Water

Res. 45, 1879-1889.

68 |