Skip to main content
NCBI home page
ACS Omega logoLink to ACS Omega
. 2025 Feb 5;10(6):5537–5553. doi: 10.1021/acsomega.4c08152

Valorizing Banana Peel Waste into Mesoporous Biogenic Nanosilica and Novel Nano-biofertilizer Formulation Thereof via Nano-biopriming Inspired Tripartite Interaction Studies

Ajay Kumar †,‡, Rishabh †, Neetu Singh †,*, Yogendra K Gautam §, Priya †, Namrata Malik †
PMCID: PMC11840586  PMID: 39989758

Abstract

graphic file with name ao4c08152_0013.jpg

The present study attempts to valorize banana peel waste (BPW) into high-value precipitated nanosilica-based agri-input. XRD analysis revealed smaller-sized biogenic nanosilica (BNS) with an increase (without heating) or decrease (with heating) in the duration of acid pretreatment during the pre-calcination step. The highest BNS yield was recorded in post-calcinated BPW ash involving simultaneous acid and heat treatment (1 h) (SA-3). FTIR analysis displayed an intense peak at 1078.3 cm–1, indicating “Si–O–Si bond” asymmetric vibrations. FESEM-EDX micrographs revealed high-purity BNS of predominantly spheroid morphology. The BJH plot exhibited mesoporous nanosilica with a median pore diameter of ∼33.82 nm. The bipartite interaction of 0.001 g mL–1 BNS signifies growth-promoting effects on Bacillus subtilis (BS) and Raphanus sativus (RS). The nano-primed RS seeds showed higher germination indices over non-primed seeds at 0.001 g of BNS mL–1. Further, the nano-biopriming studies showed the synergistic response of BNS and BS interaction on RS seeds in terms of higher seedling growth, biomass content, and stress tolerance index. The findings open new avenues for developing nano-biofertilizer formulations that serve multifaceted functions such as waste management and biomass valorization into value-added products and fulfill sustainable development goals.

1. Introduction

Musa paradisiaca L. (M. paradisiaca), commonly known as banana, belongs to the family Musaceae, widely recognized as an edible fruit.1 According to the FAO,2 India is the largest banana producer (27.6 MT), followed by China (12.1 MT), the Philippines, and Brazil (6.9 MT).3 Almost 60% of the banana fruit part, known as the peel, is discarded as waste.4 Nearly 30–40% of banana production is vetoed as a consequence of poor quality standards, and the damage proportion to fruit during transportation is also very high.1

Fruit residues are one of the critical biowaste among different agricultural wastes.3,5 Nearly 3.5 MT/year of banana peel waste (BPW) is produced globally by food industries.3 According to another report, annually, ∼114.08 MMT of banana waste loss is generated worldwide, despite significant hemicellulose, cellulose, and natural fibers contents. The conventional routes for disposing of fruit residues, like composting, burning, and landfilling,6 can attract severe environmental consequences, including GHG emissions that could result in global climate change.7

As per reports, GHG emissions like carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), and nitrous oxide (N2O) owing to waste disposal have increased by ∼142, ∼253, and ∼121%, respectively.3 Fruit wastes are the third source of GHG emissions in the USA and China.2,3,8 According to Oelofse and Nahman,9 each ton of fruit/food waste grossly generates ∼4.14 tons of CO2 via direct emissions or indirectly through microbial metabolism.3 N2O, CO2, and CH4 have also been defined as the main contributors to global warming, among which the former have more pronounced effects.3,10−12

Banana peel (BP) comprised ∼30–40% of its fruit weight in total, with 60–65, 5–10, and 6–8% of cellulose, lignin, and hemicellulose, respectively.3,11,13 In another study, BP’s hemicellulose, lignin, and cellulose contents were ∼11.87, ∼7.3, and ∼28.57%, respectively.14 Apart from natural biopolymers, it contains proteins, lipids, dietary fibers, secondary metabolites (phenols, carotenoids, flavonoids, amine derivates, phytosterols, etc.),1 and minerals (in mg/100 g) like sodium (∼115.1), magnesium (∼44.5), iron (∼47), calcium (∼59.1), phosphorus (∼211.3), zinc (∼0.033), copper (∼0.51), manganese (∼0.702), and potassium (∼4.39).15

The rich biochemical profile of BPW7 can be valorized into numerous value-added products such as biofuels, biofertilizers, and different nanomaterials.6,16−19 Serna-Jiménez et al.16 recorded 182 LCH4/(kg of volatile solids) via mesophilic biomethanation of BPW. Ruangtong et al.20 demonstrated the reducing and capping potential of BPW crude extract in ZnO nanosheet synthesis. Naeem et al.17 utilized BP fibers with bacterial cellulose to develop a reinforced composite with higher tensile strength and thermal stability. Other reported nanomaterials obtained from BPW are carbon quantum dots (∼5 nm),18 palladium NPs,21 CuO/NiO nanocomposites,22 silver NPs,23 and titanium NPs.24 The BPW-derived nanoparticles showed significant antibacterial, anticancer, drug-delivery, and dye degradation potential.20,25−27 Therefore, nanotechnology-inspired valorization can be an attractive strategy for constructive mitigation of BPW into high-value products with multifarious utilities.

Many researchers have advocated nanosilica production from agro-industrial wastes.6,28−34 Compared to chemical synthesis, biogenic nanosilica production has various advantages, such as being low-cost, energy-efficient, and eco-friendly.35 Among different forms, the precipitated silica has growing industrial demand.33 Nanosilica has applications in bio-imaging, biomedicine, biosensors, environmental remediation (recovery of heavy metals, nonmetals, radioactive compounds, oil, antibiotics, etc.), agriculture (stimulates the growth of beneficial soil microbes, facilitates toleranceto various abiotic stresses, develops resistance against different fungal and bacterial phytopathogens, regulates activities of antioxidant enzymes, promotes overall plant growth and development, etc.), catalysis, ceramics, optics, thin films, coatings, nanocomposites for construction materials, and use as anticorrosive, antimicrobial, and anticancer agent.6,14,28,35−47

The present study uses BPW as a precursor for green-chemistry routed biogenic nanosilica (BNS) extraction. The reaction conditions favoring BNS recovery were optimized. Further, the interaction studies of BNS with agriculturally beneficial bacteria (Bacillus subtilis) (BS) and Raphanus sativus (RS) seeds were performed to develop the novel nanosilica-based biofertilizer formulation with enhanced plant-growth-promoting activities.

2. Experimental Section

2.1. Chemicals and Raw Material

The chemicals employed in the present study, viz., 35–37% hydrochloric acid (maximum impurity levels, 0.0316%), sodium hydroxide (≥97% pure), sodium chloride (99.5% pure), 4% sodium hypochlorite (0.002% maximum impurity as manganese), and ethanol (99.9%), were of analytical grade and used without further purification. The preparation of reagents was performed in triple-distilled water (TDW), and glassware was thoroughly washed and sterilized for ∼2 h at 180 °C.48,49 BPW was procured from the nearby fruit juice corner, sorted, sliced into small pieces, and cleaned with tap water, followed by TDW. Further, the excess water from BPW slices was soaked using blotting sheets, completely dried at 60 °C, ground into fine powder form, and passed through a standard-size sieve to obtain a uniform particle size. The resultant powder was stored in an airtight jar until use.

2.2. Preliminary Analysis of BPW Powder

The BPW powder was subjected to ash, dry matter (DM), moisture, total organic carbon (TOC), and organic matter (OM) analyses.50 Moisture (%) = (P – Q/P) × 100; ash (%) = R/P × 100; OM = (Q – R/Q) × 100; TOC = OM/1.724, where 1.724 is the bemlen factor, and P, Q, and R are fresh weight biomass (FWB), weight obtained after 105 °C heat treatment for 6 h, and that followed by heating for another 6 h at 600 °C, respectively. An FTIR (PerkinElmer, L1600300) spectrum was recorded in the spectral range 4000 to 450 cm–1 to investigate the functional groups present in BPW powder.49,51 Further, the aqueous extract of BPW powder was analyzed for the preliminary phytochemical analysis (i.e., alkaloids, phenols, flavonoids, carbohydrates, cardiac glycosides, tannins, quinones, terpenoids, phytosteroids, proteins, and amino acids),52−57 and observations were marked as “+”, “++”, and “+++” for trace, moderate, and high concentrations, respectively.52

2.3. Extraction of BNS

Extraction of biogenic silica from agricultural residues typically involves sol–gel precipitation and alkaline–silica separation.33 The major steps in the methodology adopted for the BNS synthesis from BPW are shown in Figure 1. First, the BPW powder (Section 2.1) was heated for 6 h at 650 °C in a muffle furnace to obtain ash. BPW ash undergoes acid leaching (1:10 (w/v)) for dissolving carbonate components58 and removing metallic impurities.59 Based on acid type, treatment duration, and heating process (80 °C), 7 BPW-ash treatments were designed, viz., SA-1, HCl washing for 1 h; SA-2, HCl washing for 3 h; SA-3, HCl washing for 1 h with heat treatment; SA-4, HCl washing for 3 h with heat treatment; SA-5, H2SO4 washing for 3 h; SA-6, HNO3 washing for 3 h; SC, washing with distilled water for 3 h. The leached ash was left for 12 h in TDW under continuous stirring, followed by centrifuging at 4000 rpm for 30 min. The recovered ash containing silica undergoes alkali solubilization (3 N NaOH in 1:30 (w/v), 80 °C for 6 h in a hot water bath), resulting in sodium silicate formation, which is later precipitated at pH = 7, and heated at 80 °C for 2 h in a water bath. The obtained clear silica gel was aged for 24 h to recover the nanosilica.60 The obtained nanosilica was washed with ethanol and TDW multiple times and calcinated at 100 °C for 6 h to obtain white BNS powder. The general reaction steps involved in HCl/NaOH-inspired extraction of nanosilica are depicted in the following reactions.58

2.3.
2.3.
2.3.

Figure 1.

Figure 1

Open in a new tab

Schematic view indicating the synthesis and characterization of BNS.

2.4. Characterization of BNS

BNS was characterized for structural and optical properties. The phase and size of BNS were determined by X-ray diffractometer (Rigaku, Ultima IV) over the 2θ scanning range up to 80° (X-ray wavelength, i.e., Cu Kα anode = 0.15406 nm; tube current and voltage were 40 mA and 45 kV, respectively; scan speed = 8° min–1).61,62 The crystallite size (D) was determined using the Debye–Scherrer formula: “kλ/βhkl cos θ”, where βhkl = “full width at half-maximum” intensity value in radians; θ = peak position in radians, λ = 0.15406 nm, and k (constant) = 0.9.61 The functional group associated with BNS was analyzed via an FTIR spectrophotometer (PerkinElmer, L1600300) in the transmission mode (4000 to 450 cm–1 spectral range).63 The surface morphology and elemental composition of BNS were determined by “field emission scanning electron microscopy” (FE-SEM; TESCAN, MAGNA LMU), and “energy dispersive X-ray” (EDX) mapping (EDAX AMETEK, “Octane Elite Super EDS system”), respectively.49,61,64 The particle size of nanosilica was determined with TEM (JEOL JEM 2100 PLUS). The absorption spectra of BNS aqueous dispersion were recorded at room temperature via UV–vis spectroscopy (ELICO 150) in the wavelength range from 250 to 400 nm.61 Further, the recorded absorbance data were converted to estimate the band gap energy (Eg, in eV) from Eg = hc/λmax, where c = 3 × 108 m s–1 and h = 4.135 × 10–6 eV.65 “Brunauer–Emmett–Teller” (BET) analysis (MicrotracBEL Corp., BELSORP-maxII (S/N: 175, Ver 2.0.1.1) was performed on BNS at adsorption temperature 77.355 K under nitrogen atmosphere to study the surface characteristics, i.e., pore diameter and volume through BET and “Barret–Joyner–Halenda” (BJH) plot using data analysis software (BELSORP, BELMaster, Ver 7.2.0.4).66,67

2.5. Maintenance of B. subtilis Culture

Bacillus subtilis (B. subtilis; Gram positive (Gram +ve) bacteria) were maintained in nutrient broth (NB) of the following composition (w/v): peptone (0.5%), yeast extract (0.2%), NaCl (0.5%), and beef extract (0.1%). pH was attuned at ∼7.4. For solid media plates, 2% (w/v) agar was added to the above NB composition. The nutrient medium was autoclaved for 15 min under 15 lbs of pressure and 121°C temperature, followed by cooling at room temperature (RT) before use. For experimental studies, B. subtilis cell suspension maintained at active log phase (inoculated into NB media followed by incubating at 37 °C for overnight) was considered.61,68−70

2.6. Disk Diffusion Assay (DDA) and Growth Kinetics Study

The freshly prepared nutrient media were poured into Petri plates and solidified for nearly 30 min. B. subtilis cell culture (BCC) was spread over solidified media plates. The sterile disks of filter paper nearly 6 mm in diameter were dipped in the variable treatment doses of BNS prepared in aqueous solution (until saturation) and equidistantly placed on the inoculated plates. The disks dipped in TDW served as a negative control. The inoculated media plates were incubated in a BOD incubator at 37 °C for a 24 h duration. Serial dilutions for colony count of B. subtilis (cultured in NB with and without BNS) were performed on nutrient agar media, and plates were incubated as mentioned for DDA.71,72 For bacterial growth kinetics studies, the BCC maintained at the logarithmic phase was first diluted to obtain optical density (OD) of about 0.1 at 600 nm (equivalent to ∼108 CFU mL–1) and then grown at 37 °C in NB media (with and without BNS). The turbidity measurements were performed using a UV–vis spectrophotometer (OD at 600 nm).61,73−76

2.7. Seed Germination Assay

Raphanus sativus (L.) (R. sativus; radish) was chosen as a model plant in the present study due to its rapid growth and higher germination rate.61 The uniform-sized healthy seeds of radish were surface sterilized using sodium hypochlorite solution (2.5% (w/v))61 for ∼5 min and then washed thrice with sterile TDW. Five seeds were placed equidistantly on the Petri dish equipped with a sterile filter paper soaked with 4 mL of the test sample or TDW (served as a control). The prepared Petri dishes were then incubated at 25 ± 1 °C in the dark77 for ∼7 days, and germination data were recorded upon the emergence of the radicle (∼2 mm)78 beyond the seed coat. The growth indices were measured for germination percentage (G, %), seedling length (SL),79 fresh weight (FWB), and dry weight biomass (DWB),80 vigor index (VI-I and -II),81,82 and stress tolerance index (STI) for seedling parameters such as radicle length (RL), plumule length (PL), SL, FWB, and DWB.83,84

2.7.
2.7.
2.7.
2.7.

The experiments were carried out in triplicates in a “complete randomized design”; the recorded mean values of independent triplicate trials were denoted as mean ± SD.61 We have performed a “Pearson correlation coefficient (r) analysis” to study the association between investigated germination indices under variable treatments, and the r-value closer to +1 or −1 indicated a “strong positive correlation” or “strong negative correlation”, respectively.61,85

2.8. Antioxidant Assay

Total phenol content (TPC) was determined as per Khatiwora et al.86 with slight modifications. Germinated seedlings of radish (GSH) were extracted in 80% (v/v) ethanol, and the volume was marked up to 3 mL with TDW. In the next step, 0.5 mL of FC reagent (1:1 with TDW) was added, followed by 2 mL of 20% sodium carbonate. The test sample was heated for ∼2 min and cooled at RT, and the absorbance was recorded using a UV–vis spectrophotometer at 650 nm wavelength. The curve was plotted against the gallic acid standard, and TPC was expressed as “mg of GAE equivalent/(g of sample)”. Total flavonoid content (TFC) was determined, as mentioned in Baba and Malik,87 with few modifications. A 1 mL aliquot of ethanolic extract of GSH was added to 4 mL of TDW, followed by 0.3 mL of aqueous solution of 5% sodium nitrite and incubated at RT for 5 min. Next, 0.3 mL of aqueous aluminum chloride solution (10%) was added to the test sample and incubated for 6 min at RT, and then 2 mL of 1 M aqueous NaOH solution was added and the volume marked up to 10 mL with TDW. The absorbance was recorded using a UV–vis spectrophotometer at 510 nm wavelength. The curve was plotted against the quercetin standard, and TFC was expressed as “mg of quercetin equivalent per g of sample”.

A hydrogen peroxide (H2O2) assay on GSH was performed as per Yahyaoui et al.88 with slight modifications. Briefly, the GSH was homogenized in 5 mL of 0.1% (w/v) chilled trichloroacetic acid (TCA), incubated for ∼30 min at RT, and centrifuged to collect the supernatant. To 1.0 mL of the test sample, equal volumes (2 mL each) of potassium phosphate buffer (10 mM, pH 7) and 1 M potassium iodide were added. The absorbance was recorded at wavelength 390 nm, and H2O2 content was determined from the extinction coefficient value of 0.28 mM–1 cm–1. A lipid peroxidation assay to determine the malondialdehyde (MDA) content was performed according to Iftikhar and Perveen89 with slight modifications. A 1 mL aliquot of supernatant (prepared as mentioned in the H2O2 assay) was added to 4 mL of 0.5% thiobarbituric acid (prepared in 20% TCA) and heated at ∼95 °C for ∼30 min, followed by cooling at RT. The absorbance was recorded at wavelengths 600 and 532 nm. MDA content (nmol/mL) was calculated using [(absorbance532 – absorbance600)/155000] × 106.90

3. Results and Discussion

3.1. Characterization of BPW Powder

BPW showed moisture, DM, OM, and TOC contents (weight %) of 90.82 ± 1.90, 9.18 ± 1.90, 83.60 ± 0.62, and 48.19 ± 0.86, respectively. As per the reports, these parameters can be varied depending on the plant variety, prevailing environmental conditions, etc.91,92 The ash content in BPW was 15.85 ± 0.67%, which is in agreement with the previous findings.93,94 The EDX (Oxford Instruments) analysis of BPW showed “Si” and “O” contents (weight %) of 6.67 and 26.54, respectively. The reported elemental impurities were Mg, P, S, Cl, K, Ca, Mn, Rb, Nb, and Pb95 (Supporting Information Figure S1). Preliminary phytochemical analysis of the aqueous BPW extract showed the presence of alkaloids, phenols, flavonoids, carbohydrates, cardiac glycosides, tannins, quinones, terpenoids, phytosteroids, proteins, and amino acids (Table 1). Previous studies mentioned most of these metabolites in banana peel’s aqueous/organic solvent extracts.96−99

Table 1. Preliminary Phytochemical Analysis of the Powdered BPW Aqueous Extract.

Compound Test Resulta Observation
Alkaloids Mayer ++ Whitish/cream colored precipitate
  Wagner +++ Reddish-brown precipitate
Phenols FeCl3 + Intense color
Flavonoids Lead acetate ++ Yellow precipitate
  Alkaline reagent + Intense-yellow color
Carbohydrates Fehling’s + Yellowish/brownish-red precipitate
  Molish – Violet color not appearing at the junction of two-liquid layers
Proteins and amino acids Biuret ++ Purplish-violet/pinkish-violet color
  Xanthoprotic ++ Yellow precipitate
  Ninhydrin – Blue/Purple color not appeared
Cardiac glycosides Keller-Kiliani + Reddish brown color at junction of two-liquid layers and upper layer appeared bluish green
Tannins Lead acetate +++ Yellow precipitate
Quinones Acid precipitation ++ Red precipitate
Terpenoids Salkowski + Red-brown precipitate
Phytosteroids Hesse’s reaction + Chloroform layer red and acid layer greenish-yellow
Open in a new tab
a

Concentrations: “+” = trace, “++” = moderate, and “+++” = high.

FTIR spectra of BPW powder show peaks at 2919.47, 2851.2, 1602.8, 1379.2, 1245, 1038.02, and 895.27 cm–1 (Figure 2a). The peaks recorded for BPW ash were at 2988.27, 1985, 1448.3, 1045.7, 880.4, and 702.16 cm–1 (Figure 2b). Similar records were documented in earlier studies. Memon et al.100 in FTIR analysis of banana peel powder, observed peaks at 884.6, 1035.2, 1613.6, 1734, 2850.6, and 2920.3 cm–1 corresponding to NH amine deformation, CO stretching of ester/ether, OH bending, carboxylate stretching, CO, and CH stretching of ester/COOH, respectively. In another work, Udochukwu and Akpoviri101 noted peaks at 2919.47 and 895.27 cm–1 in BPW powder, showing CH-stretching vibrations of CH3/CH2/CH groups, and carbohydrates and water deformation, respectively. The peaks in ash samples at 702.16 cm–1 correspond to C=C bending and C–Cl stretching, 1045.7 cm–1 indicated S=O and C–F stretching, and 1448.3 cm–1 designated calcium oxide, while calcite phases are suggested by 2988.27, and 880.4 cm–1.102−104

Figure 2.

Figure 2

Open in a new tab

FTIR spectra of BPW: (a) homogenized dried powder and (b) ash.

3.2. Synthesis and Recovery of BNS

The key reaction steps involved in the synthesis and recovery of BNS are shown in Figure 3.19 The effect of pretreatment conditions with respect to (wrt) acid type, treatment duration, and temperature on BNS recovery was investigated. The silica yield (in %) was calculated as per the following equation.105

3.2.

Figure 3.

Figure 3

Open in a new tab

Key reaction steps involved in synthesis and recovery of BNS (conceptualized from ref (19)).

The BNS yields were recorded from experimental trials carried out in triplicate. The BNS content was highest at SA-3, followed by SA-2, indicating favorable effects of heat treatment and substantial reductions in reaction time. Compared to SA-6, the BNS recovery was greater in the case of SA-5 but lower than SA-2, which preferred pretreatment of ash with HCl for 3 h over HNO3 and H2SO4 (Figure 4). Overall, compared to the control (SC), 59.5, 46.1, 39.9, 38.3, 38, and 22.8% higher BNS yields were noted in treatment samples SA-3, SA-2, SA-6, SA-4, SA-1, and SA-5, respectively. Adebisi et al.106 also reported higher Si contents in maize stalks treated with HCl before (pre-calcination) and after ashing (post-calcination).

Figure 4.

Figure 4

Open in a new tab

Recovery of BNS under different reaction conditions. (Error bar indicates mean ± SD.)

3.3. Characterization of BNS

3.3.1. XRD

XRD diffractogram showed significant peaks at 2θ angles 27.2–27.3, 31.5–31.7, 45.3–45.4, 53.7–53.8, 56.3–56.4, 66.0–66.2, and 75.1–75.2° (Figure 5a–g). BNS samples SA-2 to SA-5 also demonstrated additional peaks at 28.1–28.5, 40.3–40.7, 50–50.5, 58.5–59, 66.0–66.9, 72.8–72.9, and 83.4–83.8°. Similar peaks were reported in earlier studies by Barma et al.107 (2θ = 27, 31, 45, 56, 75, and 84°), Ali et al.108 (2θ = 40.3, and 53.9°), Silmi et al.109 (2θ = 50.14°), and Periakaruppan et al.110 (2θ = 28°) for SiO2. The HCl pretreated ash (HPA) for 3 h duration (with and without heat treatment) favored smaller-sized BNS than those obtained from HNO3 and H2SO4 treated samples. Further, the short heating duration (SHD) of HPA (SA-3) resulted in reduced-sized BNS compared to the long heating duration (LHD) (SA-4). SA-1 and SA-6 exhibited a higher BNS size than the control (SC) (Figure 5h). Overall, the crystallite size (CS) of BNS obtained at different reaction conditions ranges from ∼51 to 78 nm (except SA-6), which is in concordance with the previous report (Table S1).58 The pretreatment duration and temperature have significant effects on the size of BNS. XRD results demonstrated a decrease in BNS size with an increase (without heating) or a decrease (with heating) in the HCl preatment duration for ash. Dislocation density (δ) was calculated from the CS (D) of BNS using equation δ = 1/D2 to study the defects in SiO2 crystal structure.111 “δ” indicates the degree of crystallization and decreases with an increase in BNS size.61,111 The microstrain (εa) was determined as per equation “εa = β cos θ/(4 × 10–3)” and displayed an increasing trend in proportion with the “δ” values.112

Figure 5.

Figure 5

Open in a new tab

XRD spectra of BNS: (a) SC, (b) SA-1, (c) SA-2, (d) SA-3, (e) SA-4, (f) SA-5, (g) and SA-6. (h) Size of BNS obtained from Scherrer–Debye equation (nos. 1–7 showing peak positions corresponding to 2θ angles: ∼27.2–27.3, ∼31.5–31.7, ∼45.3–45.4, ∼53.7–53.8, ∼56.3–56.4, ∼66.1–66.2, and 75.1–75.3°, respectively).

3.3.2. UV–Vis Spectroscopy and FTIR

FTIR spectra peaks of BNS (SA-3) at 1078.3 and ∼850 cm–1, corresponding to the “Si–O–Si bond” asymmetric vibrations.63,113 The peak at 586.23 cm–1 also indicates Si–O elements.110 The minor peaks at 1500–2000 and ∼3400 cm–1 are indicative of absorbed water molecules bending and silanol or H–O–H stretching, respectively (Figure 6b).67,114 The optical properties of nanosilica are based on variable defects due to the partial formation of the “Si–O–Si tetrahedral network” (“O” and “Si” vacancies).115 UV–vis spectra of BNS synthesized at different reaction conditions showed maximum absorbance (λmax) at ∼260 nm (Figure 6a).114 The prominent peaks were also noticed at ∼300 nm.116 The band gap corresponding to λmax at 260 nm was ∼4.77 eV.117,118

Figure 6.

Figure 6

Open in a new tab

(a) UV–vis spectra showing characteristic absorption peaks of BNS synthesized at different reaction conditions. (b) FTIR spectra showing characteristic functional groups in BNS (SA-3).

3.3.3. FE-SEM, TEM, and EDX

FE-SEM micrographs indicated predominantly spheroid morphology of BNS (SA-3), which was further confirmed in TEM investigation (Figure 7a,e).119,120 The particle size calculated from TEM analysis was ∼68–170 nm. EDX mapping revealed elemental composition (weight %) of ∼31 and ∼69 “Si” and “O”, respectively (Figure 7b,c). The atomic percentages of “Si” and “O” were ∼20, and ∼80%, respectively. However, the elemental composition may vary with the choice of template and extraction process adopted.58 Joni et al.121 synthesized SiO2 nanoparticles with elemental “Si” and “O” contents of ∼38 and ∼62%, respectively. Stanley and Nesaraj122 reported 56.63 and 43.37 wt % “O” and “Si”, respectively, in nanosilica (synthesized without surfactant).

Figure 7.

Figure 7

Open in a new tab

(a) FESEM micrograph at 150k× magnification (100 nm scale) (Inset: enlarged view showing spheroid morphology.) (b) EDX spectra (c) Elemental color mapping from EDX (d) Nitrogen adsorption–desorption isotherm curve (e) TEM image (at 1 μm scale) of BNS (SA-3).

3.3.3.4. BET Analysis

The nitrogen adsorption–desorption curve of BNS (SA-3) displayed type-IV isotherm according to IUPAC classifications (Figure 7d).64 The total pore volume (p/po = 0.990) obtained from the BET plot was 0.01 cm3 g–1. Alhadhrami et al.58 reported a pore volume of 0.062 cm3 g–1 for biogenic silica extracted from RH. In another study, Araichimani et al.123 obtained a pore volume of 0.094 cm3 g–1 from BJH analysis for RH-derived nanosilica. The pore volume can be varied with the substrate material (precursor), operational conditions during the extraction process, and crystallinity of nanosilica.108,124−127 Idris et al.124 found lower pore volume for crystalline nanosilica (0.0021a and 0.0045b cm3 g–1) compared to amorphous nanosilica (0.678a and 0.327b cm3 g–1) derived from corncobsa and olive stonesb. Ramasamy et al.125 from wheat straw ash derived amorphous nanosilica with a micropore volume of 0.013 cm3 g–1. The BJH plot of BNS (SA-3) revealed mesoporous nanosilica with average and median pore diameters of ∼19.55 and ∼33.82 nm, respectively,60,128,129 and surface area of ∼2.16 m2g–1.

3.4. Effect of BNS on Bacterial Growth

To explore BNS and BS as a novel combination for plant-growth-promoting (PGP) activities, we first investigated the effect of direct BNS (SA-3) treatment on BS. For this purpose, disc diffusion assay (DDA) and bacterial growth kinetics (BGK) studies were performed (Figure 8). No ZOI was noticed at 0.001 g (T1) and 0.01 g of BNS mL–1 (T2), indicating no apparent inhibitory effect of treatment doses on BS growth. Previously, Ferrusquía-Jiménez et al.40 did not find any toxicity effects of 0.0001 g of nanosilica mL–1 against “Bacillus cereus-Amazcala” (B.c-A.). For cell viability analysis, colony count was performed, and the CFUs recorded for T1 and T2 showed ∼16.8 and ∼12.5% increments compared to the control. The findings of BGK studies allow for determining the bacterial cell density (BCD) and the toxicity of NPs in a liquid medium.61 The absorbance values recorded at 600 nm (OD600) showed higher BCD in T1 than in the control. However, T2 displayed lower OD600 values compared to those of the control. Overall, the findings signify that the BNS treatment up to 0.001 g mL–1 could have growth-promoting effects on BS. Karunakaran et al.45 reported an increase in the growth of four PGP rhizobacteria (PGPRs) (Pseudomonas fluorescens, Bacillus brevis, Azotobacter vinelandii, and Bacillus megaterium) by >20% upon nanosilica treatment. They noted doubling in PGPRs CFUs (×108) counts (g–1 of soil) from 4 to 8.

Figure 8.

Figure 8

Open in a new tab

Growth kinetics curve of B. subtilis (insets: (a) CFU count; (b) disc diffusion assay results at different treatment doses of BNS) (C = control, T1 = 0.001 g of BNS mL–1, and T2 = 0.01 g of BNS mL–1).

The mechanism of SiO2 adsorption on the cell surface of Gram-positive bacteria is typically governed by the presence of teichoic (TEA) and teichuronic acid (TUA) in the cell wall130 (Figure 9). TEA and TUA contain phosphate and carboxylate groups, respectively, that aid negative charge to the bacterial cell surface (BCS) and facilitate SiO2 binding.130 In some bacteria, proteins (SiP) also played a significant role in SiO2 uptake.45 Studies also mentioned that the hydration property of silica could facilitate its attraction on the bacterial surface.45 Tian et al.131 reported the possibility of SiO2 interaction with BCS-associated proteins in a few bacteria via hydrogen bonding with amino acid residues.

Figure 9.

Figure 9

Open in a new tab

Probable mechanism of silica adsorption by B. subtilis (conceptualized from refs (45 and 130−135)) (BCS, bacterial cell surface; PEM, phosphate enriched media; PDM, phosphate deficit media; SiP, silica induced protein; ABC, ATP-binding cassette; Aa, amino acid).

3.5. Effect of BNS on Seed Germination

Figure 10 shows the general mechanism of silica uptake by the plants. In soil application, silicic acid is the major available form of silica and is taken by roots via passive or active transport. Transport proteins (LSi) play an essential role in the active transport of silica. Silica is deposited in vascular bundles as phytoliths, and in plants such as grasses, it forms a secondary cuticle-Si protective layer. SiNPs, in the case of foliar application, gain entry into leaves via cuticle (through penetration or diffusion) or stomatal pores and translocated to roots via phloem.

Figure 10.

Figure 10

Open in a new tab

Mechanism of silica uptake by plants (conceptualized from refs (35, 37, and 140−143)) (SiNPs, silica nanoparticles; EMC, excess mass infiltration; DF, diffusion; PN, penetration; TPs, transport proteins).

In the present study, RS seeds exposed to filter papers soaked with 0.001 (Te) and 0.01 (Tf) g BNS mL–1 (nonpriming experiments) showed lower germination indices compared to the control. However, RL and RLTI values were higher in “Te” than “Tf” and control. In the case of seeds nanoprimed with 0.001 g mL–1 BNS (Tc), higher PL, RL, SL, FWB, VI, and stress tolerance indices were obtained than those of control, “Te”, “Tf”, and "Td". Also, the marginal increment in G (%) and DWB was recorded in control over “Te”. Studies reported growth-prompting effects of nanosilica on several crops like wheat, tomato, sugar cane, maize, rice, soybean, potato, etc., which help to alleviate abiotic stress such as salinity, heavy metal, heat, drought, etc.37,38,136,137

The comparative assessment of nanopriming and nonpriming experiments indicated growth-promoting effects of seed nanoprimed with 0.001 g of BNS mL–1 (Tc), which concords with previous reports.138 Sun et al.138 recorded an improvement in phyto-biomass, seed germination, chlorophyll, and protein contents in wheat and lupin at mesoporous nanosilica concentrations of 0.0005 and 0.001 g mL–1. Zaheer et al.139 also found an increase in plant height and biomass weight in Vigna radiata (L.) after application of nanosilica (0.002, 0.0002, and 0.000002 mg L–1) on 6 days old plants, compared to control. Karunakaran et al.45 noted 100% seed germination in maize in the case of nanosilica treatment, as against 97, and 95% in microsilica and control experiments, respectively. Elamawi et al.42 performed a foliar application of 0.00005 mg L–1 nanosilica on Fusarium fujikuroi infested rice seedlings and witnessed an increase in grain yield and a reduction in bakanae disease symptoms. We observed that “Tf” exhibited lower germination indices than the control, "Te", "Td", and "Te", indicating phytotoxicity of direct BNS exposure at elevated doses on RS seeds.

3.6. Tripartite Interaction Studies

The tripartite interaction of RS seeds with BS (biopriming) followed by BNS (nano-biopriming) showed a synergistic response in terms of seedling growth, biomass content, vigor indices, and stress tolerance potential. The nano-biopriming using 0.001 g of BNS mL–1 (Ta) indicated ∼21, ∼27.5, ∼23.9, ∼17, ∼12.4, ∼16.5, and ∼35% higher PL, RL, SL, FWB, DWB, VI-2, and VI-2, respectively, compared to control (Figure 11a,b). PL, SL, FWB, DWB, and VI-2 also showed increments in “Ta” seedlings with respect to “Td” (nanopriming using 0.001 g of BNS mL–1). These values, coupled with higher tolerance indices in “Ta”, favored the growth-promoting effects of combined BS–BNS treatment over solitary treatment of BNS (Figure 11e). Ferrusquía-Jiménez et al.40 performed co-application of B.c-A. and 0.0001 g mL–1 of nanosilica on chili pepper plants and observed increments in leaves number, G (%) of seeds, plant height, yield, and number of fruits.40 Except for RL, we found that all of the germination indices values were lower in treatment "Tb" (nano-biopriming using 0.01 g of BNS mL–1) compared to control (Figure 11a,b). The data recorded for “Tb” and “Tf” when compared to control, “Ta”, and “Td” demonstrated phytotoxicity at a higher dose of BNS (0.001 g mL–1) irrespective of treatment mode. An integration of biopriming along with BNS treatment displayed positive interaction with RS seeds and supported PGP activities together with stress tolerance potential. In this way, the effective dose of BNS has also been reduced substantially, hence promoting judicious use of agri-inputs, keeping sustainable agricultural practices in view. Table 2 shows strong positive correlation between SL-PL, SL-PL, FWB-RL, and FWB-DWB (R2 ≥ 0.95); DWB-RL, DWB-SL, and SL-FWB (0.94 ≥ R2 ≥ 0.90); and PL-RL, PL-FWB, and PL-DWB (R2 ≤ 0.89).

Figure 11.

Figure 11

Open in a new tab

Effect of BNS and BS treatments on (a) seedling length and (b) biomass content. Antioxidant activity: (c) total phenol and flavonoid contents and (d) hydrogen peroxide and malonaldehyde content. (e) Stress tolerance indexes for different growth parameters (Ta = BS/0.001 g of BNS mL–1 (priming), Tb = BS/0.01 g of BNS mL–1 (priming), Tc = 0.001 g of BNS mL–1 (priming), Td = 0.01 g of BNS mL–1 (priming), Te = 0.001 g of BNS mL–1 (nonpriming), and Tf = 0.01 g of BNS mL–1 (nonpriming); error bars indicate mean ± SD).

Table 2. Correlation Analyses between the Recorded Germination Indices of R. sativusa.

3.6.

Open in a new tab
a

Note: Growth parameters were recorded for experimental trials “C”, and “Ta” to “Tf”.

3.7. Antioxidant Activities

TPC and TFC were estimated for “treated” and “control” RS seedlings. “Ta”, and “Tc” showed ∼20.3 and ∼28.2% higher TPC and ∼24.1 and ∼34.6% higher TFC, w.r.t. control, respectively (Figure 11c). The results promoted nanopriming and nano-biopriming of seeds using BNS (0.001 g of BNS mL–1) over other treatments and control. Sun et al.138 observed no oxidative stress up to 0.002 g mL–1 of nanosilica and recommended for applications in plants over the tested range. Even Ferrusquía-Jiménez et al.40 noted defense-associated response of nanosilica (0.0001 mg L–1)/B.c-A. co-application in chili pepper plant in terms of higher superoxide dismutase and catalase activities. The H2O2 content analysis demonstrated higher values in the following treatments (compared to control): Td (∼22.6%) > Tc (∼18.2%) > Tf (∼17.7%) > Tb (∼12.5%) (Figure 11d). MDA contents showed ∼43.6, ∼35.1, ∼31, and ∼20.4% increments in “Td”, “Tc”, “Tb”, and “Tf”, respectively, w.r.t. control, indicating significant stress at elevated doses of BNS, precisely at direct seed treatment (Td) (nanopriming).

3.8. Credit of BNS for Long-Term Agricultural Applications

To ascertain the suitability of developed BNS for long-term agricultural applications, we have performed interaction studies of BNS with BS and RS. The bipartite interaction of BNS with B. subtilis (BS) showed no obvious toxicity at both of the tested doses (i.e., 0.001 and 0.01 g mL–1). The increase in CFU counts at 0.001 g of BNS mL–1 was in agreement with the previous reports. Karunakaran et al.45 observed the growth-promoting effects of nanosilica against four PGP rhizobacteria. Their seed germination studies also revealed no phytotoxicity symptoms and oxidative stress in RS at 0.001 g of BNS mL–1. Despite this, we have witnessed the synergistic response of BNS and BS interaction on germination indices, tolerance index, and antioxidant levels of RS.40 However, to better understand the credit of nanosilica for long-term applications, we recommend additional investigations exploring their effect of introduction on the environment during agriculture applications via foliar spraying or soil fertigation.

3.9. Economic Analysis

As per the “Nano Silica Market Research” report, the nanosilica market from USD ($) 4.6 billion (valued in 2021) is expected to reach $8.6 billion by the year 2031, rising at a 6.5% CAGR from 2022 to 2031.144 We have encountered few reports on the cost–benefit analysis of biogenic nanosilica production. Maroušek et al.115 extracted nanosilica from coir-pith via an acid-based sol–gel method and projected cost valued at 1.3 Euros (€)/g (expenses breakup owing to energy, reactants, feedstock and processing, labor, equipment depreciation, and others were 0.2, 0.3, 0.1, 0.2, 0.4, and 0.1 €, respectively) against the wholesale market price of about 2.4–3.3 €/g. Singh et al.67 estimated Sapindus mukorossi seed extract stabilized nanosilica production cost of $24.19 per kg (expenses breakup include the cost of paddy straw, S. mukorossi seeds, chemicals, labor, energy, and capital) from paddy straw ash against the market price of ∼$198 per kg, with net profit of about $173.81 per kg. These figures suggest the tremendous feasibility of commercial nanosilica production by exploring various low-cost precursor substrates.

4. Conclusions

Banana peel waste has been successfully utilized as a low-cost precursor substrate for developing biogenic nanosilica (BNS). The highest BNS yield at SA-3 directed toward favorable effects of heat treatment and a significant reduction in reaction time. The obtained BNS was of comparable grade as those per previous reports on silica extraction from rice straw, sugar cane bagasse, etc. XRD crystallite and TEM particle sizes were ∼66.52 and ∼68–170 nm, respectively, and FTIR analysis revealed silanol functional groups. The average pore diameter calculated from the BJH plot was ∼19.55 nm. Overall, BNS (SA-3) characterization studies confirmed the nanosized, mesoporous structure with a predominantly spheroid morphology. The findings instate positive tripartite interaction of seeds with B. subtilis/BNS (SA-3) that can be productively translated into the growth-promoting novel nano-biofertilizer formulation. The study potentially served as a stepping stone toward green chemistry routed facile, cost-effective, eco-benign, and energy-efficient biogenic silica production exploiting various phytobiomass-derived agro-industrial waste. It is anticipated that the recorded observations could facilitate the concerned stakeholders engaged in the area of biomass valorization and rural development toward the productive materialization of plenteous agricultural residues into a comprehensive platform catering to waste management, generating high-value products, and promoting a circular bioeconomy in the purview of sustainable development goals.

Acknowledgments

The authors are grateful to the CRF, IIT Delhi, for FE-SEM, EDX mapping, and BET; CIF, Jamia Millia Islamia (New Delhi), for XRD; Professor Shailendra S. Gaurav, Department of Genetics & Plant Breeding, CCSU (Meerut) for FTIR; and Sprint testing solutions, Nagpur for TEM and EDX facilities. The support given by all during the study is acknowledged, and the authors are thankful to all who dedicated themselves by all means. Errors, if any, are purely unintentional. We attempted to acknowledge the copyright holders of all matters reproduced in this work.

Data Availability Statement

The data underlying this study are available in the published article and its Supporting Information.

Supporting Information Available

The Supporting Information is available free of charge at https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acsomega.4c08152.

  • (Figure S1) EDX analysis of BPW; (Table S1) XRD crystallite size of biogenic nanosilica obtained at different reaction conditions (PDF)

Author Contributions

A.K.: Conceptualization, investigation, writing—original draft, review and editing, and supervision. R.: Experimental, writing—original draft, and literature survey. N.S.: Overall supervision and writing–review and editing. Y.K.G.: Writing—review and data interpretation; P.: Experiment. N.M.: Supervision.

No funding was received to assist with the preparation of this manuscript.

The authors declare no competing financial interest.

Supplementary Material

ao4c08152_si_001.pdf (170.8KB, pdf)

References

  1. Hikal W. M.; Said-Al Ahl H. A. H.; Bratovcic A.; Tkachenko K. G.; Sharifi-Rad J.; Kačániová M.; Elhourri M.; Atanassova M. Banana Peels: A Waste Treasure for Human Being. Evidence-Based Complementary and Alternative Medicine 2022, 2022, 1–9. 10.1155/2022/7616452. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Food Wastage Footprint: Impacts on Natural Resources: Summary Report; Natural Resources Management and Environment Department, Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO): Rome, Italy, 2013. https://www.fao.org/3/i3347e/i3347e.pdf (accessed 2024-03-22).
  3. Sial T. A.; Khan M. N.; Lan Z.; Kumbhar F.; Ying Z.; Zhang J.; Sun D.; Li X. Contrasting Effects of Banana Peels Waste and Its Biochar on Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Soil Biochemical Properties. Process Safety and Environmental Protection 2019, 122, 366–377. 10.1016/j.psep.2018.10.030. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  4. Alzate Acevedo S.; Diaz Carrillo A. J.; Flórez-López E.; Grande-Tovar C. D. Recovery of Banana Waste-Loss from Production and Processing: A Contribution to a Circular Economy. Molecules 2021, 26, 5282. 10.3390/molecules26175282. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Peerzada J. G.; Chidambaram R. A Statistical Approach for Biogenic Synthesis of Nano-Silica from Different Agro-Wastes. Silicon 2021, 13 (7), 2089–2101. 10.1007/s12633-020-00629-5. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  6. Yadav M.; Dwibedi V.; Sharma S.; George N. Biogenic Silica Nanoparticles from Agro-Waste: Properties, Mechanism of Extraction and Applications in Environmental Sustainability. Journal of Environmental Chemical Engineering 2022, 10 (6), 108550 10.1016/j.jece.2022.108550. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  7. Farooq M.; Anwar R.; Shukat R.; Qamar Abbas S.; Ilyas N.; Cristina M.; Wang Y. Y. Ecofriendly utilization of by products from banana peel in food production and other industrial applications. A review. Carpathian J. Food Sci. Technol. 2021, 13 (4), 149–157. 10.34302/crpjfst/2021.13.4.12. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  8. Eckard R.; DPI Victoria; The University of Melbourne . Greenhouse Gas Emissions From Agriculture—Reduction Options, 2010. http://www.greenhouse.unimelb.edu.au/pdf_files/Hamilton_Field_Day2010.pdf (accessed 2024-03-22).
  9. Oelofse S. H.; Nahman A. Estimating the Magnitude of Food Waste Generated in South Africa. Waste Manag Res. 2013, 31 (1), 80–86. 10.1177/0734242X12457117. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Hu M.; Chen D.; Dahlgren R. A. Modeling Nitrous Oxide Emission from Rivers: A Global Assessment. Global Change Biology 2016, 22 (11), 3566–3582. 10.1111/gcb.13351. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Pokharel P.; Kwak J.-H.; Ok Y. S.; Chang S. X. Pine Sawdust Biochar Reduces GHG Emission by Decreasing Microbial and Enzyme Activities in Forest and Grassland Soils in a Laboratory Experiment. Science of The Total Environment 2018, 625, 1247–1256. 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2017.12.343. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Montzka S. A.; Dlugokencky E. J.; Butler J. H. Non-CO2 Greenhouse Gases and Climate Change. Nature 2011, 476 (7358), 43–50. 10.1038/nature10322. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Liew R. K.; Nam W. L.; Chong M. Y.; Phang X. Y.; Su M. H.; Yek P. N. Y.; Ma N. L.; Cheng C. K.; Chong C. T.; Lam S. S. Oil Palm Waste: An Abundant and Promising Feedstock for Microwave Pyrolysis Conversion into Good Quality Biochar with Potential Multi-Applications. Process Safety and Environmental Protection 2018, 115, 57–69. 10.1016/j.psep.2017.10.005. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  14. Manivannan H.; Krishnamurthy A.; Macherlla R.; Chidambaram S.; Pandiaraj S.; Muthuramamoorthy M.; Ethiraj S.; Kumar G. M.. Enhancing the Silica-Magnetic Catalyst-Assisted Bioethanol Production from Biowaste via Ultrasonics. Clean Technol. Environ. Policy 2023, 10.1007/s10098-023-02638-5 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  15. Hassan H. F.; Hassan U. F.; Usher O. A.; Ibrahim A. B.; Tabe N. N. Exploring the Potentials of Banana (Musa Sapietum) Peels in Feed Formulation. Int. J. Adv. Res. Chem. Sci. 2018, 5, 10–14. 10.20431/2349-0403.0505003. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  16. Serna-Jiménez J. A.; Luna-Lama F.; Caballero Á.; Martín M. D. L. Á.; Chica A. F.; Siles J. Á. Valorisation of Banana Peel Waste as a Precursor Material for Different Renewable Energy Systems. Biomass and Bioenergy 2021, 155, 106279 10.1016/j.biombioe.2021.106279. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  17. Naeem M. A.; Siddiqui Q.; Khan M. R.; Mushtaq M.; Wasim M.; Farooq A.; Naveed T.; Wei Q. Bacterial Cellulose-Natural Fiber Composites Produced by Fibers Extracted from Banana Peel Waste. Journal of Industrial Textiles 2022, 51, 990S–1006S. 10.1177/1528083720925848. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  18. Atchudan R.; Jebakumar Immanuel Edison T. N.; Shanmugam M.; Perumal S.; Somanathan T.; Lee Y. R. Sustainable Synthesis of Carbon Quantum Dots from Banana Peel Waste Using Hydrothermal Process for in Vivo Bioimaging. Physica E: Low-dimensional Systems and Nanostructures 2021, 126, 114417 10.1016/j.physe.2020.114417. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  19. Ghani U.; Hussain S.; Ali A.; Tirth V.; Algahtani A.; Zaman A.; Mushtaq M.; Althubeiti K.; Aljohani M. Hydrothermal Extraction of Amorphous Silica from Locally Available Slate. ACS Omega 2022, 7 (7), 6113–6120. 10.1021/acsomega.1c06553. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  20. Ruangtong J.; T-Thienprasert J.; T-Thienprasert N. P. Green Synthesized ZnO Nanosheets from Banana Peel Extract Possess Anti-Bacterial Activity and Anti-Cancer Activity. Materials Today Communications 2020, 24, 101224 10.1016/j.mtcomm.2020.101224. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  21. Bankar A.; Joshi B.; Kumar A. R.; Zinjarde S. Banana Peel Extract Mediated Novel Route for the Synthesis of Palladium Nanoparticles. Mater. Lett. 2010, 64 (18), 1951–1953. 10.1016/j.matlet.2010.06.021. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  22. Kaur J.; Rani S. CuO/NiO Nano-Composite Synthesized from Banana Peels for Grow Light. Materials Today: Proceedings 2023, 91, 1–6. 10.1016/j.matpr.2023.03.728. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  23. Bankar A.; Joshi B.; Kumar A. R.; Zinjarde S. Banana Peel Extract Mediated Novel Route for the Synthesis of Silver Nanoparticles. Colloids Surf., A 2010, 368 (1–3), 58–63. 10.1016/j.colsurfa.2010.07.024. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  24. Hameed R. S.; Fayyad R. J.; Nuaman R. S.; Hamdan N. T.; Maliki S. A. J. Synthesis and Characterization of a Novel Titanium Nanoparticles Using Banana Peel Extract and Investigate Its Antibacterial and Insecticidal Activity. J. Pure Appl. Microbiol 2019, 13 (4), 2241–2249. 10.22207/JPAM.13.4.38. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  25. Sengupta A.; Sarkar A. Synthesis and Characterization of Nanoparticles from Neem Leaves and Banana Peels: A Green Prospect for Dye Degradation in Wastewater. Ecotoxicology 2022, 31 (4), 537–548. 10.1007/s10646-021-02414-5. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  26. Ibrahim H. M. M. Green Synthesis and Characterization of Silver Nanoparticles Using Banana Peel Extract and Their Antimicrobial Activity against Representative Microorganisms. Journal of Radiation Research and Applied Sciences 2015, 8 (3), 265–275. 10.1016/j.jrras.2015.01.007. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  27. Gopi D.; Kanimozhi K.; Bhuvaneshwari N.; Indira J.; Kavitha L. Novel Banana Peel Pectin Mediated Green Route for the Synthesis of Hydroxyapatite Nanoparticles and Their Spectral Characterization. Spectrochimica Acta Part A: Molecular and Biomolecular Spectroscopy 2014, 118, 589–597. 10.1016/j.saa.2013.09.034. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  28. Noor U.; Soni S.; Purwar S.; Gupta E.. Sustainable Valorization of Food Waste for the Biogeneration of Nanomaterials. In Green and Sustainable Approaches Using Wastes for the Production of Multifunctional Nanomaterials; Elsevier, 2024; pp 91–101. [Google Scholar]
  29. Chaudhary S.; Jain V. P.; Sharma D.; Jaiswar G. Implementation of Agriculture Waste for the Synthesis of Metal Oxide Nanoparticles: Its Management, Future Opportunities and Challenges. J. Mater. Cycles Waste Manag 2023, 25 (6), 3144–3160. 10.1007/s10163-023-01770-0. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  30. Pal D. B.; Tiwari A. K.. Agricultural and Kitchen Waste: Energy and Environmental Aspects, 1st ed.; CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL, 2022. 10.1201/9781003245773. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  31. Ahmed M. M.; Badawy M. T.; Ahmed F. K.; Kalia A.; Abd-Elsalam K. A.. Fruit Peel Waste-to-Wealth: Bionanomaterials Production and Their Applications in Agroecosystems. In Agri-Waste and Microbes for Production of Sustainable Nanomaterials; Elsevier, 2022; pp 231–257. 10.1016/B978-0-12-823575-1.00001-9. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  32. Elemike E. E.; Ekennia A. C.; Onwudiwe D. C.; Ezeani R. O.. Agro-Waste Materials: Sustainable Substrates in Nanotechnology. In Agri-Waste and Microbes for Production of Sustainable Nanomaterials; Elsevier, 2022; pp 187–214. 10.1016/B978-0-12-823575-1.00022-6. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  33. Utama P. S.; Yamsaengsung R.; Sangwichien C. Production and Characterization of precipitated silica from palm oil mill fly ash using CO2 impregnation and mechanical fragmentation. Braz. J. Chem. Eng. 2019, 36 (1), 523–530. 10.1590/0104-6632.20190361s20170458. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  34. Sangeetha J.; Thangadurai D.; Hospet R.; Purushotham P.; Manowade K. R.; Mujeeb M. A.; Mundaragi A. C.; Jogaiah S.; David M.; Thimmappa S. C.; Prasad R.; Harish E. R.. Production of Bionanomaterials from Agricultural Wastes. In Nanotechnology; Prasad R., Kumar M., Kumar V., Eds.; Springer: Singapore, 2017; pp 33–58. 10.1007/978-981-10-4573-8_3. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  35. Sharma P.; Prakash J.; Kaushal R. An Insight into the Green Synthesis of SiO2 Nanostructures as a Novel Adsorbent for Removal of Toxic Water Pollutants. Environmental Research 2022, 212, 113328 10.1016/j.envres.2022.113328. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  36. Kamboj R.; Bains A.; Sharma M.; Kumar A.; Ali N.; Parvez M. K.; Chawla P.; Sridhar K. Green Synthesis of Rice Straw-Derived Silica Nanoparticles by Hydrothermal Process for Antimicrobial Properties and Effective Degradation of Dyes. Process Safety and Environmental Protection 2024, 185, 1049–1060. 10.1016/j.psep.2024.03.078. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  37. Goswami P.; Mathur J.; Srivastava N. Silica Nanoparticles as Novel Sustainable Approach for Plant Growth and Crop Protection. Heliyon 2022, 8 (7), e09908 10.1016/j.heliyon.2022.e09908. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  38. Larkunthod P.; Boonlakhorn J.; Pansarakham P.; Pongdontri P.; Thongbai P.; Theerakulpisut P. Synthesis and Characterization of Silica Nanoparticles from Rice Husk and Their Effects on Physiology of Rice under Salt Stress. Chil. j. agric. res. 2022, 82 (3), 412–425. 10.4067/S0718-58392022000300412. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  39. Periakaruppan R.; S M. P.; C P.; P R.; S G. R.; Danaraj J. Biosynthesis of Silica Nanoparticles Using the Leaf Extract of Punica Granatum and Assessment of Its Antibacterial Activities Against Human Pathogens. Appl. Biochem. Biotechnol. 2022, 194 (11), 5594–5605. 10.1007/s12010-022-03994-6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  40. Ferrusquía-Jiménez N. I.; González-Arias B.; Rosales A.; Esquivel K.; Escamilla-Silva E. M.; Ortega-Torres A. E.; Guevara-González R. G. Elicitation of Bacillus Cereus-Amazcala (B.c-A) with SiO2 Nanoparticles Improves Its Role as a Plant Growth-Promoting Bacteria (PGPB) in Chili Pepper Plants. Plants 2022, 11 (24), 3445. 10.3390/plants11243445. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  41. Jeelani P. G.; Mulay P.; Venkat R.; Ramalingam C. Multifaceted Application of Silica Nanoparticles. A Review. Silicon 2020, 12 (6), 1337–1354. 10.1007/s12633-019-00229-y. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  42. Elamawi R. M.; Tahoon A. M.; Elsharnoby D. E.; El-Shafey R. A. Bio-Production of Silica Nanoparticles from Rice Husk and Their Impact on Rice Bakanae Disease and Grain Yield. Archives of Phytopathology and Plant Protection 2020, 53 (9–10), 459–478. 10.1080/03235408.2020.1750824. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  43. Roohizadeh G.; Majd A.; Arbabian S. The effect of sodium silicate and silica nanoparticles on seed germination and growth in the Vicia faba L. Trop. Plant Res. 2015, 2, 85–89. [Google Scholar]
  44. Suriyaprabha R.; Karunakaran G.; Kavitha K.; Yuvakkumar R.; Rajendran V.; Kannan N. Application of Silica Nanoparticles in Maize to Enhance Fungal Resistance. IET nanobiotechnol. 2014, 8 (3), 133–137. 10.1049/iet-nbt.2013.0004. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  45. Karunakaran G.; Suriyaprabha R.; Manivasakan P.; Yuvakkumar R.; Rajendran V.; Prabu P.; Kannan N. Effect of Nanosilica and Silicon Sources on Plant Growth Promoting Rhizobacteria, Soil Nutrients and Maize Seed Germination. IET nanobiotechnol. 2013, 7 (3), 70–77. 10.1049/iet-nbt.2012.0048. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  46. Makarovsky I.; Boguslavsky Y.; Alesker M.; Lellouche J.; Banin E.; Lellouche J.-P. Novel Triclosan-Bound Hybrid-Silica Nanoparticles and Their Enhanced Antimicrobial Properties. Adv. Funct. Mater. 2011, 21 (22), 4295–4304. 10.1002/adfm.201101557. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  47. Wang L.; Zhao W.; Tan W. Bioconjugated Silica Nanoparticles: Development and Applications. Nano Res. 2008, 1 (2), 99–115. 10.1007/s12274-008-8018-3. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  48. Vikal S.; Gautam Y. K.; Meena S.; Parewa V.; Kumar A.; Kumar A.; Meena S.; Kumar S.; Singh B. P. Surface Functionalized Silver-Doped ZnO Nanocatalyst: A Sustainable Cooperative Catalytic, Photocatalytic and Antibacterial Platform for Waste Treatment. Nanoscale Adv. 2023, 5 (3), 805–819. 10.1039/D2NA00864E. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  49. Verma L. M.; Kumar A.; Bashir A. U.; Gangwar U.; Ingole P. P.; Sharma S. Phase Controlled Green Synthesis of Wurtzite (P 63 Mc) ZnO Nanoparticles: Interplay of Green Ligands with Precursor Anions, Anisotropy and Photocatalysis. Nanoscale Adv. 2023, 6 (1), 155–169. 10.1039/D3NA00596H. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  50. Sharma K.; Kumar A.; Sharma R.; Singh N. Exploring integrated methodology for phytoremediation and biofuel production potential of Eichhornia crassipes. Indian J. Biochem. Biophys. 2022, 59, 368–375. 10.56042/ijbb.v59i3.50416. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  51. Sagar N. A.; Khar A.; Vikas; Tarafdar A.; Pareek S. Physicochemical and Thermal Characteristics of Onion Skin from Fifteen Indian Cultivars for Possible Food Applications. Journal of Food Quality 2021, 2021, 1–11. 10.1155/2021/7178618. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  52. Shaikh J. R.; Patil M. Qualitative Tests for Preliminary Phytochemical Screening: An Overview. Int. J. Chem. Stud. 2020, 8 (2), 603–608. 10.22271/chemi.2020.v8.i2i.8834. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  53. Dahanayake J. M.; Perera P. K.; Galappatty P.; Melshandi Perera H. D. S.; Arawwawala L. D. A. M. Comparative Phytochemical Analysis and Antioxidant Activities of Tamalakyadi Decoction with Its Modified Dosage Forms. Evidence-Based Complementary and Alternative Medicine 2019, 2019, 1–9. 10.1155/2019/6037137. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  54. Ali S.; Khan M. R.; Irfanullah; Sajid M.; Zahra Z. Phytochemical Investigation and Antimicrobial Appraisal of Parrotiopsis Jacquemontiana (Decne) Rehder. BMC Complement Altern. Med. 2018, 18 (1), 43. 10.1186/s12906-018-2114-z. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  55. Godlewska K.; Pacyga P.; Najda A.; Michalak I. Investigation of Chemical Constituents and Antioxidant Activity of Biologically Active Plant-Derived Natural Products. Molecules 2023, 28 (14), 5572. 10.3390/molecules28145572. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  56. Le Thi V.-A.; Nguyen N.-L.; Nguyen Q.-H.; Van Dong Q.; Do T.-Y.; Nguyen T K.-O. Phytochemical Screening and Potential Antibacterial Activity of Defatted and Nondefatted Methanolic Extracts of Xao Tam Phan (Paramignya Trimera (Oliv.) Guillaum) Peels against Multidrug-Resistant Bacteria. Scientifica 2021, 2021, 4233615. 10.1155/2021/4233615. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  57. Das B. K.; Al-Amin M. M.; Russel S. M.; Kabir S.; Bhattacherjee R.; Hannan J. M. Phytochemical Screening and Evaluation of Analgesic Activity of Oroxylum indicum. Indian J. Pharm. Sci. 2014, 76, 571–575. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  58. Alhadhrami A.; Mohamed G. G.; Sadek A. H.; Ismail S. H.; Ebnalwaled A. A.; Almalki A. S. A. Behavior of Silica Nanoparticles Synthesized from Rice Husk Ash by the Sol–Gel Method as a Photocatalytic and Antibacterial Agent. Materials 2022, 15 (22), 8211. 10.3390/ma15228211. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  59. Shrestha D.; Nayaju T.; Kandel M. R.; Pradhananga R. R.; Park C. H.; Kim C. S. Rice Husk-Derived Mesoporous Biogenic Silica Nanoparticles for Gravity Chromatography. Heliyon 2023, 9 (4), e15142 10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e15142. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  60. Hoerudin; Setyawan N.; Suismono; Purwaningsih H.; Apriliani N. Morphology, Extraction Yield, and Properties of Biogenic Silica Nanoparticles from Indonesian Rice Husk as Influenced by Solvent Type and Aging Time. IOP Conf. Ser.: Earth Environ. Sci. 2022, 1024 (1), 012076 10.1088/1755-1315/1024/1/012076. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  61. Kumar A.; Verma L. M.; Sharma S.; Singh N. Zinc Oxide Nanoparticles (ZnO NPs) Stabilized by Phytocellulose Derived Biopolymer and Their Bipartite Interaction Studies with Agriculturally Important Microbes/Raphanus Sativus (L.) Seeds. Ceram. Int. 2023, 49 (24), 39771–39787. 10.1016/j.ceramint.2023.07.179. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  62. Rodríguez-Martínez J.; Sánchez-Martín M.-J.; Valiente M. Efficient Controlled Release of Cannabinoids Loaded in γ-CD-MOFs and DPPC Liposomes as Novel Delivery Systems in Oral Health. Microchim. Acta 2023, 190 (4), 125. 10.1007/s00604-023-05692-4. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  63. Biradar A. I.; Sarvalkar P. D.; Teli S. B.; Pawar C. A.; Patil P. S.; Prasad N. R. Photocatalytic Degradation of Dyes Using One-Step Synthesized Silica Nanoparticles. Materials Today: Proceedings 2021, 43, 2832–2838. 10.1016/j.matpr.2020.11.946. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  64. Sharma S. K.; Sharma A. R.; Pamidimarri S. D. V. N.; Gaur J.; Singh B. P.; Sekar S.; Kim D. Y.; Lee S. S. Bacterial Compatibility/Toxicity of Biogenic Silica (b-SiO2) Nanoparticles Synthesized from Biomass Rice Husk Ash. Nanomaterials 2019, 9 (10), 1440. 10.3390/nano9101440. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  65. Nandanwar R.; Singh P.; Haque F. Synthesis and Characterization of SiO2 Nanoparticles by Sol-Gel Process and Its Degradation of Methylene Blue. ACSJ. 2015, 5 (1), 1–10. 10.9734/ACSJ/2015/10875. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  66. Verma L. M.; Kumar A.; Kumar A.; Singh G.; Singh U.; Chaudhary S.; Kumar S.; Sanwaria A. R.; Ingole P. P.; Sharma S. Green Chemistry Routed Sugar Press Mud for (2D) ZnO Nanostructure Fabrication, Mineral Fortification, and Climate-Resilient Wheat Crop Productivity. Sci. Rep 2024, 14 (1), 4074. 10.1038/s41598-024-53682-0. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  67. Singh G.; Arora H.; Hariprasad P.; Sharma S. Development of Clove Oil Based Nanoencapsulated Biopesticide Employing Mesoporous Nanosilica Synthesized from Paddy Straw via Bioinspired Sol-Gel Route. Environ. Res. 2023, 220, 115208 10.1016/j.envres.2022.115208. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  68. Ihssen J.; Jovanovic N.; Sirec T.; Spitz U. Real-Time Monitoring of Extracellular ATP in Bacterial Cultures Using Thermostable Luciferase. PLoS One 2021, 16 (1), e0244200 10.1371/journal.pone.0244200. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  69. Ilesanmi O. I.; Adekunle A. E.; Omolaiye J. A.; Olorode E. M.; Ogunkanmi A. L. Isolation, optimization and molecular characterization of lipase producing bacteria from contaminated soil. Scientific African 2020, 8, e00279 10.1016/j.sciaf.2020.e00279. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  70. Xu X.; Cheng W.; Liu X.; You H.; Wu G.; Ding K.; Tu X.; Yang L.; Wang Y.; Li Y.; Gu H.; Wang X. Selenate Reduction and Selenium Enrichment of Tea by the Endophytic Herbaspirillum Sp. Strain WT00C. Curr. Microbiol. 2020, 77 (4), 588–601. 10.1007/s00284-019-01682-z. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  71. Nasuha Nadhirah N.; Anuar Kamaruddin M.; Nazmi Ismail M. Removal of Organic Constituents and Bacteria Count Disinfection from Fish Processing Wastewater by Using Ionic Cupric Copper. IOP Conf. Ser.: Mater. Sci. Eng. 2020, 864 (1), 012023 10.1088/1757-899X/864/1/012023. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  72. Bankier C.; Cheong Y.; Mahalingam S.; Edirisinghe M.; Ren G.; Cloutman-Green E.; Ciric L. A Comparison of Methods to Assess the Antimicrobial Activity of Nanoparticle Combinations on Bacterial Cells. PLoS One 2018, 13 (2), e0192093 10.1371/journal.pone.0192093. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  73. Rajeshkumar S.; Menon S.; Venkat Kumar S.; Tambuwala M. M.; Bakshi H. A.; Mehta M.; Satija S.; Gupta G.; Chellappan D. K.; Thangavelu L.; Dua K. Antibacterial and Antioxidant Potential of Biosynthesized Copper Nanoparticles Mediated through Cissus Arnotiana Plant Extract. Journal of Photochemistry and Photobiology B: Biology 2019, 197, 111531 10.1016/j.jphotobiol.2019.111531. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  74. Arafa M. G.; El-Kased R. F.; Elmazar M. M. Thermoresponsive Gels Containing Gold Nanoparticles as Smart Antibacterial and Wound Healing Agents. Sci. Rep. 2018, 8 (1), 13674 10.1038/s41598-018-31895-4. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  75. Wu H.; Ong Z. Y.; Liu S.; Li Y.; Wiradharma N.; Yang Y. Y.; Ying J. Y. Synthetic β-Sheet Forming Peptide Amphiphiles for Treatment of Fungal Keratitis. Biomaterials 2015, 43, 44–49. 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2014.11.052. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  76. Pal S.; Tak Y. K.; Song J. M. Does the Antibacterial Activity of Silver Nanoparticles Depend on the Shape of the Nanoparticle? A Study of the Gram-Negative Bacterium Escherichia Coli. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 2007, 73 (6), 1712–1720. 10.1128/AEM.02218-06. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  77. Bellani L.; Giorgetti L.; Riela S.; Lazzara G.; Scialabba A.; Massaro M. Ecotoxicity of Halloysite Nanotube–Supported Palladium Nanoparticles in Raphanus Sativus L. Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 2016, 35 (10), 2503–2510. 10.1002/etc.3412. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  78. Acharya P.; Jayaprakasha G. K.; Crosby K. M.; Jifon J. L.; Patil B. S. Nanoparticle-Mediated Seed Priming Improves Germination, Growth, Yield, and Quality of Watermelons (Citrullus lanatus) at Multi-Locations in Texas. Sci. Rep 2020, 10 (1), 5037. 10.1038/s41598-020-61696-7. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  79. Khan M. A. H.; Baset Mia Md. A.; Quddus Md. A.; Sarker K. K.; Rahman M.; Skalicky M.; Brestic M.; Gaber A.; Alsuhaibani A. M.; Hossain A. Salinity-Induced Physiological Changes in Pea (Pisum Sativum L.): Germination Rate, Biomass Accumulation, Relative Water Content, Seedling Vigor and Salt Tolerance Index. Plants 2022, 11 (24), 3493. 10.3390/plants11243493. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  80. Devi D.; Gupta S. B.; Mishra B. K. Effect of Plant Growth Promoting Rhizobacteria on Seed Germination Behavior and Seedling Vigour of Cumin. J. Pharmacogn. Phytochem. 2020, 9, 2284–2288. [Google Scholar]
  81. Kandasamy S.; Weerasuriya N.; Gritsiouk D.; Patterson G.; Saldias S.; Ali S.; Lazarovits G. Size Variability in Seed Lot Impact Seed Nutritional Balance, Seedling Vigor, Microbial Composition and Plant Performance of Common Corn Hybrids. Agronomy 2020, 10 (2), 157. 10.3390/agronomy10020157. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  82. Abdul-Baki A. A.; Anderson J. D. Vigor Determination in Soybean Seed by Multiple Criteria 1. Crop Science 1973, 13 (6), 630–633. 10.2135/cropsci1973.0011183X001300060013x. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  83. Nazeer H.; Rauf M.; Gul H.; Yaseen T.; Shah A. A.; Rehman K. U. Salt stress affects germination and seedling establishment in different wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) varieties. J. Pure Appl. Agric. 2020, 5, 42–51. [Google Scholar]
  84. Pour-Aboughadareh A.; Ahmadi J.; Mehrabi A. A.; Etminan A.; Moghaddam M.; Siddique K. H. M. Physiological Responses to Drought Stress in Wild Relatives of Wheat: Implications for Wheat Improvement. Acta Physiol Plant 2017, 39 (4), 106. 10.1007/s11738-017-2403-z. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  85. Bewick V.; Cheek L.; Ball J. [No Title Found]. Crit Care 2003, 7 (6), 451. 10.1186/cc2401. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  86. Khatiwora E.; Adsul V. B.; Torane R. C.; Gaikwad S.; Deshpande N. R.; Kashalkar R. V. Spectroscopic determination of total phenol and flavonoid contents of Citrus limon peel from north eastern region of India. J. Drug Delivery Ther. 2017, 7 (1), 21–24. 10.22270/jddt.v7i1.1368. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  87. Baba S. A.; Malik S. A. Determination of Total Phenolic and Flavonoid Content, Antimicrobial and Antioxidant Activity of a Root Extract of Arisaema Jacquemontii Blume. Journal of Taibah University for Science 2015, 9 (4), 449–454. 10.1016/j.jtusci.2014.11.001. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  88. Yahyaoui A.; Djebar M. R.; Khene L.; Bouarroudj T.; Khali H.; Bourayou C. Assessment of exposure wheat Triticum aestivum L. to zinc oxide nanoparticles (ZnO): evaluation of oxidative damage. Stud. Univ. "Vasile Goldis", Ser. Stiint. Vietii 2017, 27, 271–280. [Google Scholar]
  89. Iftikhar N.; Perveen S.. Riboflavin (Vitamin B2) Priming Modulates Growth, Physiological and Biochemical Traits of Maize (Zea Mays L.) under Salt Stress. Pak. J. Bot. 2024, 56 ( (4), ). 10.30848/PJB2024-4(22) [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  90. Eman Gökseven Ş.B.; Kıran S.; Ellialtıoğlu Ş.Ş. Acid and Chelate Applications on Some Morphophysiological Properties and Antioxidant Enzyme Activities of Ornamental Cabbage (Brassica Oleracea Var. Acephala) under Boron Stress. Soil Studies 2022, 11 (2), 85–95. 10.21657/soilst.1218454. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  91. Viena V.; Elvitriana; Wardani S. Application of Banana Peels Waste as Adsorbents for the Removal of CO 2, NO, NO x, and SO 2 Gases from Motorcycle Emissions. IOP Conf. Ser.: Mater. Sci. Eng. 2018, 334, 012037 10.1088/1757-899X/334/1/012037. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  92. Cruz Shannen Lyka S.; Pamintuan Francheska Edelle Lein G.; Villanueva Ronan B.; Munoz Jonathan C.; Cruz Gil G. Banana and Orange Peel Powder as Partial Cement Replacement Materials. A Comparative Analysis on Its Individual Influence on the Physicomechanical Properties of Cement. Chem. Eng. Trans. 2023, 106, 433–438. [Google Scholar]
  93. Memon J. R.; Memon S. Q.; Bhanger M. I.; El-Turki A.; Hallam K. R.; Allen G. C. Banana Peel: A Green and Economical Sorbent for the Selective Removal of Cr(VI) from Industrial Wastewater. Colloids Surf., B 2009, 70 (2), 232–237. 10.1016/j.colsurfb.2008.12.032. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  94. Sapawe N.; Surayah Osman N.; Zulkhairi Zakaria M.; Amirul Shahab Syed Mohamad Fikry S.; Amir Mat Aris M. Synthesis of Green Silica from Agricultural Waste by Sol-Gel Method. Materials Today: Proceedings 2018, 5 (10), 21861–21866. 10.1016/j.matpr.2018.07.043. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  95. Anhwange B. A.; Ugye T. J.; Nyiaatagher T. D. Chemical composition of Musa sapientum (banana) peels. EJEAFChe, Electronic J. Environ., Agric. Food Chem. 2009, 8 (6), 437–442. [Google Scholar]
  96. Puraikalan Y. Characterization of Proximate, Phytochemical and Antioxidant Analysis of Banana (Musa Sapientum) Peels/Skins and Objective Evaluation of Ready to Eat /Cook Product Made With Banana Peels. Current Research in Nutrition and Food Science Journal 2018, 6 (2), 382–391. 10.12944/CRNFSJ.6.2.13. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  97. Olakunle O.; Deborah J.; Irene O. Antifungal Activity and Phytochemical Analysis of Selected Fruit Peels. J. Biol. Med. 2019, 3 (1), 040–043. 10.17352/jbm.000013. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  98. Kibria A. A.; Kamrunnessa; Rahman Md. M.; Kar A. Extraction and Evaluation of Phytochemicals from Banana Peels (Musa Sapientum) and Banana Plants (Musa Paradisiaca). Malaysian Journal of Halal Research 2019, 2 (1), 22–26. 10.2478/mjhr-2019-0005. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  99. Bashir F.; Hassan A.; Mushtaq A.; Rizwan S.; Jabeen U.; Raza A.; Anjum S.; Masood A. Phytochemistry and Antimicrobial Activities of Different Varieties of Banana (Musa Acuminate) Peels Available in Quetta City. Polym. J. Environ. Stud. 2021, 30 (2), 1531–1538. 10.15244/pjoes/122450. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  100. Memon J. R.; Memon S. Q.; Bhanger M. I.; Memon G. Z.; El-Turki A.; Allen G. C. Characterization of Banana Peel by Scanning Electron Microscopy and FT-IR Spectroscopy and Its Use for Cadmium Removal. Colloids Surf., B 2008, 66 (2), 260–265. 10.1016/j.colsurfb.2008.07.001. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  101. Udochukwu E. C.; Akpoviri C. U. Morphological Characterization Of Banana Peel Powder As A Bio-Adsorbent For Waste Water Treatment. Int. J. Eng. 2022, 1, 1–6. [Google Scholar]
  102. Stanienda-Pilecki K. J. The importance of Fourier-Transform Infrared Spectroscopy in the identification of carbonate phases differentiated in magnesium content. Spectroscopy 2019, 34, 32–42. [Google Scholar]
  103. Nasrazadani S.; Eureste E.. Application of FTIR for Quantitative Analysis of Lime, Technical Report No. FHWA/tX-0815-9028-01-1; University of North Texas, 2008.
  104. LibreTexts, Chemistry . Infrared Spectroscopy Absorption Table. https://chem.libretexts.org/Ancillary_Materials/Reference/Reference_Tables/Spectroscopic_Reference_Tables/Infrared_Spectroscopy_Absorption_Table (accessed 2024-03-22).
  105. Nayak P. P.; Datta A. K. Synthesis of SiO2-Nanoparticles from Rice Husk Ash and Its Comparison with Commercial Amorphous Silica through Material Characterization. Silicon 2021, 13 (4), 1209–1214. 10.1007/s12633-020-00509-y. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  106. Adebisi J. A.; Agunsoye J. O.; Bello S. A.; Haris M.; Ramakokovhu M. M.; Daramola M. O.; Hassan S. B. Green Production of Silica Nanoparticles from Maize Stalk. Particulate Science and Technology 2020, 38 (6), 667–675. 10.1080/02726351.2019.1578845. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  107. Barma M. D.; Kannan S. D.; Indiran M. A.; Rajeshkumar S.; Kumar R. P. Antibacterial Activity of Mouthwash Incorporated with Silica Nanoparticles against S. Aureus, S. Mutans, E. Faecalis: An in-Vitro Study. JPRI 2020, 25–33. 10.9734/jpri/2020/v32i1630646. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  108. Ali A.; Saeed S.; Hussain R.; Afzal G.; Siddique A. B.; Parveen G.; Hasan M.; Caprioli G. Synthesis and Characterization of Silica, Silver-Silica, and Zinc Oxide-Silica Nanoparticles for Evaluation of Blood Biochemistry, Oxidative Stress, and Hepatotoxicity in Albino Rats. ACS Omega 2023, 8 (23), 20900–20911. 10.1021/acsomega.3c01674. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  109. Silmi N. I.; Antasari F. A.; et al. NPK Fertilizer With Slow Release Fly Ash. J. Pure App Chem. Res. 2018, 7, 1–11. 10.21776/ub.jpacr.2018.007.01.347. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  110. Periakaruppan R.; N R. D.; Abed S. A.; Vanathi P.; Kumar J. S. Production of Biogenic Silica Nanoparticles by Green Chemistry Approach and Assessment of their Physicochemical Properties and Effects on the Germination of Sorghum bicolor. Silicon 2023, 15, 4309–4316. 10.1007/s12633-023-02348-z. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  111. Yadav R. K.; Chauhan P. Estimation of lattice strain in Mn-doped ZnO nanoparticles and its effect on structural and optical properties. Indian J. Pure Appl. Phys. 2020, 57, 881–890. [Google Scholar]
  112. Geetha M. S.; Nagabhushana H.; Shivananjaiah H. N. Green Mediated Synthesis and Characterization of ZnO Nanoparticles Using Euphorbia Jatropa Latex as Reducing Agent. Journal of Science: Advanced Materials and Devices 2016, 1 (3), 301–310. 10.1016/j.jsamd.2016.06.015. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  113. Tasleem S.; Sabah A.; Tahir M.; Sabir A.; Shabbir A.; Nazir M. Alkyl Silica Hybrid Nanowire Assembly in Improved Superhydrophobic Membranes for RO Filtration. ACS Omega 2022, 7 (5), 3940–3948. 10.1021/acsomega.1c04498. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  114. Verma J. Analysis on Synthesis of Silica Nanoparticles and Its Effect on Growth of T. Harzianum & Rhizoctonia Species. Biomed. J. Sci. Tech. Rep. 2018, 10 (4), 7890–7897. 10.26717/BJSTR.2018.10.001972. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  115. Maroušek J.; Maroušková A.; Periakaruppan R.; Gokul G. M.; Anbukumaran A.; Bohatá A.; Kříž P.; Bárta J.; Černý P.; Olšan P. Silica Nanoparticles from Coir Pith Synthesized by Acidic Sol-Gel Method Improve Germination Economics. Polymers 2022, 14 (2), 266. 10.3390/polym14020266. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  116. Chandra S.; Beaune G.; Shirahata N.; Winnik F. M. A One-Pot Synthesis of Water Soluble Highly Fluorescent Silica Nanoparticles. J. Mater. Chem. B 2017, 5 (7), 1363–1370. 10.1039/C6TB02813F. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  117. Darabi H.; Adelifard M.; Rajabi Y. Characterization of Nonlinear Optical Refractive Index for Graphene Oxide–Silicon Oxide Nanohybrid Composite. J. Nonlinear Optic. Phys. Mater. 2019, 28 (01), 1950005 10.1142/S021886351950005X. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  118. Kaur H.; Kaur G. Spectroscopic and Quantum Chemical Computational Studies of Silica Nanocrystals Extracted from Rice Straw. Silicon 2022, 14 (12), 6803–6816. 10.1007/s12633-021-01450-4. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  119. Lee J.-H.; El-Fiqi A.; Jo J.-K.; Kim D.-A.; Kim S.-C.; Jun S.-K.; Kim H.-W.; Lee H.-H. Development of Long-Term Antimicrobial Poly(Methyl Methacrylate) by Incorporating Mesoporous Silica Nanocarriers. Dental Materials 2016, 32 (12), 1564–1574. 10.1016/j.dental.2016.09.001. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  120. Balaure P. C.; Boarca B.; Popescu R. C.; Savu D.; Trusca R.; Vasile B. Ş.; Grumezescu A. M.; Holban A. M.; Bolocan A.; Andronescu E. Bioactive Mesoporous Silica Nanostructures with Anti-Microbial and Anti-Biofilm Properties. Int. J. Pharm. 2017, 531 (1), 35–46. 10.1016/j.ijpharm.2017.08.062. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  121. Joni I. M.; Nulhakim L.; Vanitha M.; Panatarani C. Characteristics of Crystalline Silica (SiO2) Particles Prepared by Simple Solution Method Using Sodium Silicate (Na2SiO3) Precursor. J. Phys.: Conf. Ser. 2018, 1080, 012006 10.1088/1742-6596/1080/1/012006. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  122. Stanley R.; Nesaraj A. S. Effect of surfactants on the wet chemical synthesis of silica nanoparticles. Int. J. Appl. Sci. Eng. 2014, 12, 9–21. [Google Scholar]
  123. Araichimani P.; Prabu K. M.; Kumar G. S.; Karunakaran G.; Surendhiran S.; Shkir M; AlFaify S. Rice Husk-Derived Mesoporous Silica Nanostructure for Supercapacitors Application: A Possible Approach for Recycling Bio-Waste into a Value-Added Product. Silicon 2022, 14 (15), 10129–10135. 10.1007/s12633-022-01699-3. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  124. Idris I.; Naddaf M.; Harmalani H.; Alshater R.; Alsafadi R. Efficacy of Olive Stones and Corncobs Crystalline Silica Nanoparticles (SiO2, NPs) Treatments on Potato Tuber Moths (Phthorimaea Operculella). Silicon 2023, 15 (8), 3591–3598. 10.1007/s12633-022-02286-2. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  125. Ramasamy S. P.; Veeraswamy D.; Ettiyagounder P.; Arunachalam L.; Devaraj S. S.; Krishna K.; Oumabady S.; Sakrabani R. New Insights Into Method Development and Characterization of Amorphous Silica From Wheat Straw. Silicon 2023, 15 (12), 5049–5063. 10.1007/s12633-023-02396-5. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  126. Hanna S. B.; Mansour T. S.; Ajiba N. A. Processing and Characterization of Nano Silica and Iron Oxide Coated Silica Composites Extracted from Rice Hulls. Silicon 2023, 15 (14), 6099–6111. 10.1007/s12633-023-02491-7. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  127. Seroka N. S.; Taziwa R.; Khotseng L. Green Synthesis of Crystalline Silica from Sugarcane Bagasse Ash: Physico-Chemical Properties. Nanomaterials 2022, 12 (13), 2184. 10.3390/nano12132184. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  128. Hoffmann F.; Cornelius M.; Morell J.; Fröba M. Silica-Based Mesoporous Organic–Inorganic Hybrid Materials. Angew. Chem. Int. Ed 2006, 45 (20), 3216–3251. 10.1002/anie.200503075. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  129. Prabha S.; Durgalakshmi D.; Rajendran S.; Lichtfouse E. Plant-Derived Silica Nanoparticles and Composites for Biosensors, Bioimaging, Drug Delivery and Supercapacitors: A Review. Environ. Chem. Lett. 2021, 19 (2), 1667–1691. 10.1007/s10311-020-01123-5. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  130. Gordienko A. S.; Kurdish I. K. Surface Electrical Properties of Bacillus Subtilis Cells and the Effect of Interaction with Silicon Dioxide Particles. Biophysics 2007, 52 (2), 217–219. 10.1134/S0006350907020121. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  131. Tian B.; Liu Y.; Chen D. Adhesion Behavior of Silica Nanoparticles with Bacteria: Spectroscopy Measurements Based on Kinetics, and Molecular Docking. J. Mol. Liq. 2021, 343, 117651 10.1016/j.molliq.2021.117651. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  132. Omardien S.; Brul S.; Zaat S. A. J. Antimicrobial Activity of Cationic Antimicrobial Peptides against Gram-Positives: Current Progress Made in Understanding the Mode of Action and the Response of Bacteria. Front. Cell Dev. Biol. 2016, 4, 111. 10.3389/fcell.2016.00111. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  133. Sewell E. W.; Brown E. D. Taking Aim at Wall Teichoic Acid Synthesis: New Biology and New Leads for Antibiotics. J. Antibiot. 2014, 67 (1), 43–51. 10.1038/ja.2013.100. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  134. Brown S.; Santa Maria J. P.; Walker S. Wall Teichoic Acids of Gram-Positive Bacteria. Annu. Rev. Microbiol. 2013, 67 (1), 313–336. 10.1146/annurev-micro-092412-155620. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  135. Sharma S. K.; Chiang L. Y.; Hamblin M. R. Photodynamic Therapy with Fullerenes In Vivo : Reality or a Dream?. Nanomedicine 2011, 6 (10), 1813–1825. 10.2217/nnm.11.144. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  136. Dorairaj D.; Govender N.; Zakaria S.; Wickneswari R. Green Synthesis and Characterization of UKMRC-8 Rice Husk-Derived Mesoporous Silica Nanoparticle for Agricultural Application. Sci. Rep 2022, 12 (1), 20162 10.1038/s41598-022-24484-z. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  137. Taqdees Z.; Khan J.; Khan W.-D.; Kausar S.; Afzaal M.; Akhtar I. Silicon and Zinc Nanoparticles-Enriched Miscanthus Biochar Enhanced Seed Germination, Antioxidant Defense System, and Nutrient Status of Radish under NaCl Stress. Crop & Pasture Science 2022, 73 (5), 556–572. 10.1071/CP21342. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  138. Sun D.; Hussain H. I.; Yi Z.; Rookes J. E.; Kong L.; Cahill D. M. Mesoporous Silica Nanoparticles Enhance Seedling Growth and Photosynthesis in Wheat and Lupin. Chemosphere 2016, 152, 81–91. 10.1016/j.chemosphere.2016.02.096. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  139. Zaheer S.; Shehzad J.; Chaudhari S. K.; Hasan M.; Mustafa G. Morphological and Biochemical Responses of Vigna Radiata L. Seedlings Towards Green Synthesized SiO2 NPs. Silicon 2023, 15 (14), 5925–5936. 10.1007/s12633-023-02470-y. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  140. Mir R. A.; Bhat B. A.; Yousuf H.; Islam S. T.; Raza A.; Rizvi M. A.; Charagh S.; Albaqami M.; Sofi P. A.; Zargar S. M. Multidimensional Role of Silicon to Activate Resilient Plant Growth and to Mitigate Abiotic Stress. Front. Plant Sci. 2022, 13, 819658 10.3389/fpls.2022.819658. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  141. Wang L.; Ning C.; Pan T.; Cai K. Role of Silica Nanoparticles in Abiotic and Biotic Stress Tolerance in Plants: A Review. IJMS 2022, 23 (4), 1947. 10.3390/ijms23041947. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  142. Sarkar M. M.; Mathur P.; Mitsui T.; Roy S. A Review on Functionalized Silica Nanoparticle Amendment on Plant Growth and Development under Stress. Plant Growth Regul 2022, 98 (3), 421–437. 10.1007/s10725-022-00891-0. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  143. Irfan M.; Maqsood M. A.; Rehman H. U.; Mahboob W.; Sarwar N.; Hafeez O. B. A.; Hussain S.; Ercisli S.; Akhtar M.; Aziz T. Silicon Nutrition in Plants under Water-Deficit Conditions: Overview and Prospects. Water 2023, 15 (4), 739. 10.3390/w15040739. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  144. Nano Silica Market Research Nano Silica Market Size, Share, Competitive Landscape and Trend Analysis Report by Product, by Application: Global Opportunity Analysis and Industry Forecast, 2022–2031. Report Code: A02110; Allied Market Research, 2022; pp 282. https://www.alliedmarketresearch.com/nano-silica-market (accessed 2024-04-22).

Associated Data

This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

Supplementary Materials

ao4c08152_si_001.pdf (170.8KB, pdf)

Data Availability Statement

The data underlying this study are available in the published article and its Supporting Information.

Articles from ACS Omega are provided here courtesy of American Chemical Society

RESOURCES