Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35332293›Full record

ArticleNature nanotechnology2022

Nano-enabled pesticides for sustainable agriculture and global food security.

Dengjun Wang, Navid B Saleh, Andrew Byro, Richard Zepp, Endalkachew Sahle-Demessie, Todd P Luxton, Kay T Ho, Robert M Burgess, Markus Flury, Jason C White and 1 more

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Nature nanotechnology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 122 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
122citing papers in PubMed
56.5field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

122 citing papers in PubMed, 750 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. A GAPlant communications · 2026
    Article
  7. Functionalized FePest management science · 2026
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article

62 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.

Dengjun WangOak Ridge Institute for Science and Education, US Environmental Protection Agency, Ada, OK, USA. dzw0065@auburn.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2047-5260
Navid B SalehDepartment of Civil, Architectural and Environmental Engineering, University of Texas, Austin, TX, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6092-5783
Andrew ByroAntimicrobials Division, Office of Pesticide Programs, US Environmental Protection Agency, Arlington, VA, USA.
Richard ZeppCenter for Environmental Measurement and Modeling, Office of Research and Development, US Environmental Protection Agency, Athens, GA, USA.
Endalkachew Sahle-DemessieCenter for Environmental Solutions and Emergency Response, Office of Research and Development, US Environmental Protection Agency, Cincinnati, OH, USA.
Todd P LuxtonCenter for Environmental Solutions and Emergency Response, Office of Research and Development, US Environmental Protection Agency, Cincinnati, OH, USA.
Kay T HoCenter for Environmental Measurement and Modeling, Office of Research and Development, US Environmental Protection Agency, Narragansett, RI, USA.
Robert M BurgessCenter for Environmental Measurement and Modeling, Office of Research and Development, US Environmental Protection Agency, Narragansett, RI, USA.
Markus FluryDepartment of Crop and Soil Sciences, Washington State University, Puyallup and Pullman, WA, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3344-3962
Jason C WhiteConnecticut Agricultural Experiment Station, New Haven, CT, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5001-8143
Chunming SuCenter for Environmental Solutions and Emergency Response, Office of Research and Development, US Environmental Protection Agency, Ada, OK, USA. Su.Chunming@epa.gov.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4914-4606
Environmental Protection Agency · USConnecticut Agricultural Experiment Station · USEnvironmental Protection Agency · GHThe University of Texas at Austin · USWashington State University · US

Funding

Intramural EPA EPA999999
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Achieving sustainable agricultural productivity and global food security are two of the biggest challenges of the new millennium. Addressing these challenges requires innovative technologies that can uplift global food production, while minimizing collateral environmental damage and preserving the resilience of agroecosystems against a rapidly changing climate. Nanomaterials with the ability to encapsulate and deliver pesticidal active ingredients (AIs) in a responsive (for example, controlled, targeted and synchronized) manner offer new opportunities to increase pesticidal efficacy and efficiency when compared with conventional pesticides. Here, we provide a comprehensive analysis of the key properties of nanopesticides in controlling agricultural pests for crop enhancement compared with their non-nanoscale analogues. Our analysis shows that when compared with non-nanoscale pesticides, the overall efficacy of nanopesticides against target organisms is 31.5% higher, including an 18.9% increased efficacy in field trials. Notably, the toxicity of nanopesticides toward non-target organisms is 43.1% lower, highlighting a decrease in collateral damage to the environment. The premature loss of AIs prior to reaching target organisms is reduced by 41.4%, paired with a 22.1% lower leaching potential of AIs in soils. Nanopesticides also render other benefits, including enhanced foliar adhesion, improved crop yield and quality, and a responsive nanoscale delivery platform of AIs to mitigate various pressing biotic and abiotic stresses (for example, heat, drought and salinity). Nonetheless, the uncertainties associated with the adverse effects of some nanopesticides are not well-understood, requiring further investigations. Overall, our findings show that nanopesticides are potentially more efficient, sustainable and resilient with lower adverse environmental impacts than their conventional analogues. These benefits, if harnessed appropriately, can promote higher crop yields and thus contribute towards sustainable agriculture and global food security.

Indexed as

NanostructuresPesticidesAgricultureFood SecuritySoilPesticidesSoil

Identifiers

PMID35332293
PMCPMC9774002
OpenAlexW4221087568

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.