Intergenerational responses of wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) to cerium oxide nanoparticles exposure.

The intergenerational impact of engineered nanomaterials in plants is a key knowledge gap in the literature. A soil microcosm study was performed to assess the effects of multi-generational exposure of wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) to cerium oxide nanoparticles (CeO2-NPs). Seeds from plants that were exposed to 0, 125, and 500 mg CeO2-NPs/kg soil (Ce-0, Ce-125 or Ce-500, respectively) in first generation (S1) were cultivated in factorial combinations of Ce-0, Ce-125 or Ce-500 to produce second generation (S2) plants. The factorial combinations for first/second generation treatments in Ce-125 were S1-Ce-0/S2-Ce-0, S1-Ce-0/S2-Ce-125, S1-Ce-125/S2-Ce-0 and S1-Ce-125/S2-Ce-125, and in Ce-500 were S1-Ce-0/S2-Ce-0, S1-Ce-0/S2-Ce-500, S1-Ce-500/S2-Ce-0 and S1-Ce-500/S2-Ce-500. Agronomic, elemental, isotopic, and synchrotron X-ray fluorescence (XRF) and X-ray absorption near-edge spectroscopy (XANES) data were collected on second generation plants. Results showed that plants treated during the first generation only with either Ce-125 or Ce-500 (e.g. S1-Ce-125/S2-Ce-0 or S1-Ce-500/S2-Ce-0) had reduced accumulation of Ce (61 or 50%), Fe (49 or 58%) and Mn (34 or 41%) in roots, and δ15N (11 or 8%) in grains compared to the plants not treated in both generations (i.e. S1-Ce-0/S2-Ce-0). Plants treated in both generations with Ce-125 (i.e. S1-Ce-125/S2-Ce-125) produced grains that had lower Mn, Ca, K, Mg and P relative to plants treated in the second generation only (i.e. S1-Ce-0/S2-Ce-125). In addition, synchrotron XRF elemental chemistry maps of soil/plant thin-sections revealed limited transformation of CeO2-NPs with no evidence of plant uptake or accumulation. The findings demonstrated that first generation exposure of wheat to CeO2-NPs affects the physiology and nutrient profile of the second generation plants. However, the lack of concentration-dependent responses indicate that complex physiological processes are involved which alter uptake and metabolism of CeO2-NPs in wheat.

[1]  E. Brugnoli,et al.  Effects of Salinity on Stomatal Conductance, Photosynthetic Capacity, and Carbon Isotope Discrimination of Salt-Tolerant (Gossypium hirsutum L.) and Salt-Sensitive (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) C(3) Non-Halophytes. , 1991, Plant physiology.

[2]  Cyren M. Rico,et al.  Physiological and biochemical response of soil-grown barley (Hordeum vulgare L.) to cerium oxide nanoparticles , 2015, Environmental Science and Pollution Research.

[3]  Carmen García-Olaverri,et al.  Leaf δ15N as a physiological indicator of the responsiveness of N2-fixing alfalfa plants to elevated [CO2], temperature and low water availability , 2015, Front. Plant Sci..

[4]  J. Cock,et al.  Laboratory manual for physiological studies of rice , 1971 .

[5]  Cyren M. Rico,et al.  In situ synchrotron X-ray fluorescence mapping and speciation of CeO₂ and ZnO nanoparticles in soil cultivated soybean (Glycine max). , 2013, ACS nano.

[6]  Cyren M. Rico,et al.  Cerium oxide nanoparticles impact yield and modify nutritional parameters in wheat (Triticum aestivum L.). , 2014, Journal of agricultural and food chemistry.

[7]  J. Peralta-Videa,et al.  Physiological and Biochemical Changes Imposed by CeO2 Nanoparticles on Wheat: A Life Cycle Field Study. , 2015, Environmental science & technology.

[8]  Yongsheng Chen,et al.  Trans-generational impact of cerium oxide nanoparticles on tomato plants. , 2013, Metallomics : integrated biometal science.

[9]  Sudipta Seal,et al.  The role of cerium redox state in the SOD mimetic activity of nanoceria. , 2008, Biomaterials.

[10]  G. Fellet,et al.  Changes in Physiological and Agronomical Parameters of Barley (Hordeum vulgare) Exposed to Cerium and Titanium Dioxide Nanoparticles , 2016, International journal of environmental research and public health.

[11]  Jordi Voltas,et al.  Use of carbon isotope composition in monitoring environmental changes , 2003 .

[12]  W. Stark,et al.  Influence of two types of organic matter on interaction of CeO2 nanoparticles with plants in hydroponic culture. , 2013, Chemosphere.

[13]  J. Renaut,et al.  An improved protocol to study the plant cell wall proteome , 2015, Front. Plant Sci..

[14]  T. Arao,et al.  Arsenic distribution and speciation near rice roots influenced by iron plaques and redox conditions of the soil matrix. , 2014, Environmental science & technology.

[15]  J. Peralta-Videa,et al.  Interactions between CeO2 Nanoparticles and the Desert Plant Mesquite: A Spectroscopy Approach , 2016 .

[16]  J. Peralta-Videa,et al.  Cerium dioxide and zinc oxide nanoparticles alter the nutritional value of soil cultivated soybean plants. , 2014, Plant physiology and biochemistry : PPB.

[17]  S. Bandyopadhyay,et al.  Exposure of cerium oxide nanoparticles to kidney bean shows disturbance in the plant defense mechanisms. , 2014, Journal of hazardous materials.

[18]  Jason C. White,et al.  Nanotechnology in agriculture: Next steps for understanding engineered nanoparticle exposure and risk , 2016 .

[19]  I. Rao,et al.  Root adaptations to soils with low fertility and aluminium toxicity , 2016, Annals of botany.

[20]  Donald Arthur Horneck,et al.  SOIL, PLANT AND WATER REFERENCE METHODS FOR THE WESTERN REGION 1 , 2005 .

[21]  S. Sultan,et al.  Adaptive transgenerational plasticity in an annual plant: grandparental and parental drought stress enhance performance of seedlings in dry soil. , 2012, Integrative and comparative biology.

[22]  Junzhe Zhang,et al.  Phytotoxicity, uptake and transformation of nano-CeO2 in sand cultured romaine lettuce. , 2017, Environmental pollution.

[23]  W. Reisser,et al.  Evaluation of the influence of arsenic species on the nitrogen metabolism of a model angiosperm: nasturtium, Tropaeolum majus , 2005 .

[24]  D. Chittleborough,et al.  Solubility and batch retention of CeO2 nanoparticles in soils. , 2011, Environmental science & technology.

[25]  K. Jung,et al.  Effects of heavy metals on the nitrogen metabolism of the aquatic mossFontinalis antipyretica L. ex Hedw , 2002, Environmental science and pollution research international.

[26]  Hyungwon Choi,et al.  Environmental Effects of Nanoceria on Seed Production of Common Bean (Phaseolus vulgaris): A Proteomic Analysis. , 2015, Environmental science & technology.

[27]  M. Marcus,et al.  Spatial distribution and speciation of arsenic in peat studied with Microfocused X-ray fluorescence spectrometry and X-ray absorption spectroscopy. , 2013, Environmental science & technology.

[28]  J. White,et al.  CuO Nanoparticle Interaction with Arabidopsis thaliana: Toxicity, Parent-Progeny Transfer, and Gene Expression. , 2016, Environmental science & technology.

[29]  Arturo A. Keller,et al.  Global life cycle releases of engineered nanomaterials , 2013, Journal of Nanoparticle Research.

[30]  Cyren M. Rico,et al.  Trophic transfer, transformation, and impact of engineered nanomaterials in terrestrial environments. , 2014, Environmental science & technology.

[31]  Hongtao Wang,et al.  Stability and aggregation of metal oxide nanoparticles in natural aqueous matrices. , 2010, Environmental science & technology.

[32]  J. White,et al.  Multigenerational exposure to cerium oxide nanoparticles: Physiological and biochemical analysis reveals transmissible changes in rapid cycling Brassica rapa , 2016 .