Syeda Bariyyah Hasnain

Roll no. 31
 Particles having sizes between 1 and 100nm with a surrounding
interfacial layer.
 Used in diverse commercial products
 Have toxic properties anti-microbial

 oxidative stress ROS

 Applicable for soil remediation.

 Among NPs, a wide range of different materials with
diverse physical, chemical, and toxicological
properties exist.
i. Metal and metal oxides
ii. Carbon nanoparticles
iii. Nanoscale zerovalent iron (nZVI) particles

potential to remediate diverse

environmental contaminants
 Depends upon the concentration, the
exposure time, and the measured activity.
 Ag-NPs reduce:
i. Substrate-induced respiration
ii. Enzymatic activities Urease
 Net nitrogen mineralization
 Increase of the metabolic quotient
 Iron oxides:
Fe2O3-NPs Stimulate urease and invertase activities

Fe3O4-NPs Do not induce any modification of enzymatic

activities
 Aged TiO2-NPs:
Stimulate urease activity
Decrease catalase and peroxidase activities
 ZnO-NPs:
Reduced protease, catalase, and peroxidase
activities
 Have a very low toxic potential
Fullerene (C60) no adverse effect on soil
respiration or enzymatic activities
MWCNT
reduction of the enzymatic
SWCNT activities at high concentrations

 Negative effects more severe on fungal

biomass
 Decreasesof the activity of
chloroaromatic mineralizing
microorganisms

•Loss of biodegradative
functions
•Redox properties of
these particles induces
modification of the
conc. of either the
product or substrate
 Microbial biomass is a sensitive indicator
of pollution
 Quantified by various techniques
Fumigation–extraction
Extractable soil DNA
Quantitative PCR

“Targeting
universal genes (16S
or 18SrRNA genes)
or functional genes”
 Metal and metal oxide nanoparticles:
 Fe3O4-NPs : Stimulate Actinobacteria, Duganella,
Streptomycetaceae, or Nocardioides
 TiO2 and ZnO-NPs: nitrogen fixing groups and methane
oxidizing groups

 Zeta potential values becoming

unavailable to exert toxic effects.
 Fullerene NPs:
 Only slight modification of Eubacteria and Protozoans
 MWCNT:
 Diversity and richness…. Not effected
 significant modification of the bacterial composition
 Enrichment of ; Rhodococcus, Cellulomonas, Norcardioles,
and Pseudomonas
 Reduction of Derxia, Holophaga
 SWCNTs:
 induced a modification of microbial community
composition
 Decrease of Gram positive and negative bacteria as well
as fungal biomass
 Significantshifts in the structure and phylogenetic
composition of the soil microbial community
 Exerts a selective pressure on the microbial
community

Dominance of:
•Archaea
•α-Proteobacteria
•Gram-positive Decrease of:
bacteria •β- and γ-
Proteobacteria
 Ithas been demonstrated using different methodologies,
different indicators, and natural soils, which NPs could have
an impact on microbial activities, abundances, and diversity
 Toxic effects on microbial community are highly dependent
on:
1. NPs considered
2. The soil properties
 Soil properties seem to play a key role for the bioavailability
of NPs-the clay and organic matter content