In the 21st century, nanotechnology is becoming one of the most abundant technologies in the life of human being. Growing applications of nanostructures in various sciences and technologies resulted in the increasing demand for the sustainable production of nanostructures. Nowadays, physical and chemical techniques for the fabrication of nanostructures have been perfectly developed. Nonetheless, these techniques are energy-consuming and employ organic solvents and toxic chemicals. Plant-mediated synthesis (green synthesis) is now growing as a sustainable substitution for traditional physical and chemical methods. Since now, different parts of various plants have been used for this purpose. The experiments in this field were extended to the discovery of the effective parameters in the green synthesis of nanostructures. Also, novel techniques were developed to boost the potential of the plant extract for the fabrication of nanostructures and controlling the reaction process. These issues are discussed in detail in this chapter following a review on the green synthesis of the most important and applicable nanostructures such as iron, silver, gold, zinc, and copper nanoparticles.
Nanomaterials are going to be ubiquitous in almost all sciences, technologies, and commercial products. Metallic nanoparticles are one of the most applied nanomaterials with diverse properties and functions. Unique physicochem-ical properties of these materials make them the arrowhead of applied nanotechnology. These particles are now being used in various fields such as biotechnology, chemical engineering (Ebrahiminezhad et al. 2017a, 2016i, Raee et al. 2018, Ranmadugala et al. 2017a, b, c, d, e, 2018, Viola et al. 2018), civil engineering (Seifan et al. 2017, 2018a, b, c) and medical sciences (Ebrahiminezhad et al. 2016a, e, b, 2012a, 2014b, 2015a). Also these compounds make a promising future in environmental sciences (Ebrahiminezhad et al. 2017e). Expansion in the applications of metallic nanoparticles resulted in the increasing demand for the production of these materials. Since now, physical and chemical processes, both in top-down and bottom-up approaches (Figure 3.1), have been well developed for the preparation of nanomaterials (Ebrahiminezhad et al. 2012b, 2013, 2014a). Bottom-up is the more accepted approach due to better control on the synthesis process and properties of the prepared nanomaterials. This approach is performed in a chemical process by using ionic precursors of intended metal (Ebrahiminezhad et al. 2017a, Taghizadeh et al. 2017). However, the process is usually multistep and requires harsh conditions with high energy consumption. Chemical approaches also employ organic solvents and toxic chemicals which raise environmental concerns (Ebrahimi et al. 2016a, b, Iida et al. 2007, Li et al. 2009, Mandal et al. 2005, Park et al. 2004, Si et al. 2004, Sun et al. 2007, Wang et al. 2001, Yu et al. 2006). In addition, remnants of chemicals and organic solvents as contaminants can limit biological and biomedical applications of the chemically synthesized nanostructures. Production of stable and biocompatible nanoparticles is another concern in chemical synthesis. From chemical and colloidal point of view, naked nanoparticles are not stable and need to be coated or capped with biocompatible and hydrophilic compounds.
Green chemistry has emerged as a new concept in chemistry and synthesis technologies to eliminate hazardous chemicals and organic solvents especially from industrial process. This technique is based on swapping chemical compounds and organic solvents with biochemical species and aqueous matrix, respectively (Ebrahiminezhad et al. 2016a, b, c). Plants and microorganisms are the most studied sources for biologic compounds in regard to green synthesis. These organisms can produce biochemical compounds which are capable to synthesize and stabilize metallic nanoparticles. Since now, various microorganisms including bacteria, fungi, cyanobacteria, microalgae, and yeasts have been used for the synthesis of metallic nanoparticles (Ali et al. 2011, Chokshi et al. 2016, Ebrahiminezhad et al. 2016a, 2017h, Jena et al. 2015, Kannan et al. 2013, Kathiraven et al. 2015, Kianpour et al. 2016, Mohseniazar et al. 2011, Prasad et al. 2013, Sinha et al. 2015, Xie et al. 2007a, b). Both intracellular and secretory compounds were shown to be effective in this regard (Ebrahiminezhad et al. 2016a, Xie et al. 2007a, b). Using microorganisms for the production of nanoparticles has some major drawbacks. Most of the employed organisms are opportunistic or pathogenic, and nanoparticles that derived from such sources cannot be approved for pharmaceutical and biomedical applications. On the other hand, microbial cells usually grown in the complex and expensive media through labour-intensive and time-consuming process (Ebrahiminezhad et al. 2017h, Kianpour et al. 2016, Raĭkher et al. 2010). Disposal of culture wastes such as produced biomass and waste media is the other problem.
Figure 3.1 Top-down and bottom-up approaches in the fabrication of nanoparticles.
To eliminate technical problems in microbial synthesis, plant-mediated synthesis is a promising substitution toward green and economic synthesis of nanoparticles. Now various plants, such as trees, flowers, and herbs, are being used for this purpose (Cruz et al. 2010, Ebrahiminezhad et al. 2016b, c, Mo et al. 2015). But herbs are among the widely used ones due to being cheap, abundant, ubiquitous, safe, and rich in plenty of organic and reducing compounds which are effective for nanoparticles synthesis. Most importantly, using herbs in the production process resulted in the fabrication of particles with unique properties (Ebrahiminezhad et al. 2016c, 2017e). All parts of plants can be applied in the green synthesis of nanoparticles, considering leaf extract being the mostly used one. For instance, leaf extract of eucalyptus, black and green tea, Lippia citriodora (Lemon Verbena), maple (Acer sp.), Lantana camara, Artemisia annua, and Ephedra intermedia, and Mediterranean cypress (Cupressus sempervirens) were used for the synthesis of different metal nanoparticles (Ajitha et al. 2015, Basavegowda et al. 2014, Cruz et al. 2010, Ebrahiminezhad et al. 2016f, 2017e, Mo et al. 2015, Wang et al. 2014b, Xiao et al. 2015). Other parts of plants such as flower extract of Matricaria chamomilla, stem extract of Desmodium gangeticum, coffee powder extract, Piper longum and Crataegus douglasii, fruit extract, orange peel extract, Cinnamon zeylanicum bark extract, seed exudate from Sterculia foetida and Medicago sativa, and oil of Plukenetia volubilis L. were also used (Azad and Banerjee 2014, Ebrahiminezhad et al. 2016c, Ghaffari-Moghaddam and Hadi-Dabanlou 2014, Kahrilas et al. 2014, Kumar et al. 2014c, d, Lukman et al. 2011, Nadagouda and Varma 2008, Rajasekharreddy and Rani 2014, Reddy et al. 2014, Sathishkumar et al. 2009).
In this chapter, we discuss the plant-mediated green synthesis of nanoparticles in detail with focus on the molecular mechanism, effective parameters, and how to boost the synthesis reaction. Finally, there is a review on the plant-mediated synthesized nanoparticles and their characteristic features.
Plant extracts are commonly rich in phytochemicals which are able to act as reducing agent and convert metal ions to metal nanoparticles. There is no exact knowledge about the effective molecules in the reduction of metal ions. But, some investigations have shown that oxygen-bearing functional groups such as hydroxyl, phenol, carboxyl, and carbonyl are the sites for entrapment and reduction of metal ions (Kozma et al. 2015). It is evident that plants with high contents in phenolic compounds are the best choice for green synthesis purposes. Phenolic compounds from Salvia officinalis, Zataria multiflora, Melaleuca nesophila, Eucalyptus tereticornis, Rosmarinus officinalis, Mansoa alliacea, and green tea were found to be the effective molecules in the formation of nanoparticles (Markova et al. 2014, Prasad 2016, Soliemanzadeh et al. 2016, Wang et al. 2015, 2014c). But some of these studies, especially those that examined the green tea extract for the synthesis of iron-based nanoparticles, have claimed that polyphenol compounds chelate iron ions to form nanostructures of iron complexes (Markova et al. 2014, Wang et al. 2015, 2014c).
Naked nanoparticles are chemically and colloidally unstable and should be coated or capped with a protective and hydrophilic compound (Ebrahiminezhad et al. 2012b). Also, the coating should be biocompatible if it is planned to apply nanoparticles in biological and biomedical fields. In the common chemical synthesis procedure, naked nanoparticles are coated by using biocompatible coatings such as polymers, carbohydrates, amino acids, lipoamino acids, and silica (Ebrahiminezhad et al. 2012b, 2013, 2014b, 2015a, Gholami et al. 2016, 2015, Gupta and Wells 2004, Muddineti et al. 2016, Ragaseema et al. 2012). In addition to fabricate nanoparticles, plant extracts provide stabilizing or capping agents which can engulf synthesized nanoparticles and make them colloidally and chemically stable (Ebrahiminezhad et al. 2016f, 2017c, f). Also, microparticles in the plant extract can act as a platform for the formation and stabilization of nanoparticles (Ebrahiminezhad et al. 2016g). Some evidences have shown that carbohydrates are the molecules that act in the way to engulf and stabilize nanoparticles (Ebrahiminezhad et al. 2016c, f, 2017g).
Synthesis of a particular nanoparticle by using various plant extract will not result in the similar particles. Various plants contain different patterns of phytochemicals which results in the production of different nanoparticles with different physicochemical characteristics. For instance, chemical structure, size, and shape of iron nanoparticles which were synthesized with various plant extracts are listed in Table 3.1. Diverse iron-based nanoparticles from zero valent to iron oxides (Fe3O4 and Fe2O3), iron oxide hydroxides (α-FeOOH and β-FeOOH), and iron complexes were synthesized by different plants. These particles have come in different shapes such as spherical, rod, triangular, cylindrical, cubic, and irregular clusters (Ebrahiminezhad et al. 2017g). Also, it is obvious that in the same plant, the pattern of phytochemicals has seasonal variations, and consequently, a particular plant cannot produce exactly same particles throughout a year (Ncube et al. 2011). This can be considered as a drawback for plant-mediated synthesis of nanoparticles that can be addressed by deposition of dried leaves.
The major advantage of plant-mediated synthesis of nanostructures is the elimination of organic solvents use. However, non-aqueous extracts can also be used for this purpose. Alcohols are the mostly used organic solvents along with the other derivatives of alcohols and organic solvents such as dichloromethane, n-hexane, n-butanol, chloroform, and ethyl acetate (Chitsazi et al. 2016, Lee et al. 2016, Nagababu and Rao 2017, Ojha et al. 2017, Sithara et al. 2017).
Employed solvent has an immense effect on the characteristic features of the prepared nanoparticles. For instance, methanolic extract of Pulicaria gnaphalodes provides separate spherical silver nanoparticles. But, by employing dichloromethane porous polyhedral and aggregated particles are produced (Chitsazi et al. 2016). Vélez et al. (2018) have shown that methanolic extract of Aloe vera produces silver nanoparticles with a size ranging from 2 to 7 nm. Authors also reported that employing aqueous extract of Aloe vera resulted in the larger nanoparticles with more broad size distribution (Vélez et al. 2018).
Difference in the characteristic features of the prepared particles using various solvents is due to difference in the effective compounds responsible for nanoparticles reduction and stabilization. Luis M. Carrillo-López and colleagues in 2016 find out that phenolic compounds (flavonoids and tannins) are the compounds responsible for reducing and stabilizing silver nanoparticles using methanolic extract of Chenopodium ambrosioides. But, in the dichloromethane and hexane extracts, the responsible compounds were mainly terpenoids including trans-diol, α-terpineol, monoterpene hydroperoxides, and apiole (Carrillo-López et al. 2016). Similar differences were also reported for Ocimum sanctum extracts using solvents with different polarity. Methyl eugenol and β-caryophyllene were found in the hexane extract, while glycerol, phosphoric acid, succinic acid, tartaric acid, D-gluconic acid, myo-inositol, 2-methoxy-4-vinylphenol, and ferulic acid were identified in the aqueous extract (Lee et al. 2016).
As mentioned previously, aqueous extract is the most employed extract for the green synthesis of nanoparticles (Basavegowda et al. 2014, Chitsazi et al. 2016, Mo et al. 2015, Rajasekharreddy and Rani 2014, Reddy et al. 2014, Sun et al. 2014, Vivekanandhan et al. 2014). Employing aqueous extract makes the process more economical, environment-friendly, and sustainable. In this regard, the desired part of the plant should be washed to remove any possible mods and dusts, and then dried and ground to fine powder. After sieving, the powder is mixed with deionized water (1–10 w/v %) and is boiled under reflux to avoid evaporation (Cruz et al. 2010, Dubey et al. 2010a, Ghaffari-Moghaddam and Hadi-Dabanlou 2014, Goodarzi et al. 2014, He et al. 2013, Lukman et al. 2011, Nadagouda and Varma 2008, Njagi et al. 2011). Then, the mixture is filtered to remove plant slag and centrifuged to harvest plant microparticles. Resulted clear solution can be used as a natural source of reducing and stabilizing agents for the green synthesis of nanoparticles. This process is schematically illustrated in Figure 3.2.
Plant |
Chemical Structure |
Size (nm) |
Shape |
Reference |
---|---|---|---|---|
Hordeum vulgare |
Magnetite |
Up to 30 |
Spherical | |
Rumex acetosa |
|
10–40 |
|
|
Green tea |
Magnetite FeOOH |
40–60 nm |
Irregular cluster | |
Eucalyptus |
IONPs ZVI NPs |
20–80 nm |
Spherical | |
Sorghum spp. |
FeOOH |
50 nm |
Irregular cluster | |
Tangerine |
IONPs |
50–200 nm |
Spherical | |
Soya bean |
Magnetite |
8 nm |
Spherical | |
Watermelon |
Magnetite |
20 nm |
Spherical | |
Mimosa pudica |
Magnetite |
60–80 nm |
Spherical | |
Caricaya papaya |
Magnetite |
irregular |
Irregular | |
Green tea |
ZVI, IONPs, FeOOH, & Fe2O3 |
40–50 nm |
Spherical | |
Oolong tea |
|
|
|
|
Black tea |
|
|
|
|
Eucalyptus |
ZVI, FeOOH |
20–80 nm |
Quasi-spherical | |
Green tea |
|
|
|
|
Omani mango |
Maghemite Hematite |
15 ± 2 |
Nano-rods | |
Salvia officinalis |
Fe2O3 |
5–25 nm |
Spherical | |
Eucalyptus |
|
60–20 nm |
| |
Pomegranate |
ZVI |
10–30 nm |
Spherical | |
Mulberry |
|
|
|
|
Cherry |
|
|
|
|
Mulberry |
ZVI |
5–10 nm |
Spherical | |
Pomegranate |
|
100 nm |
Irregular |
|
Peach |
|
|
|
|
Pear |
|
|
|
|
Vine |
|
|
|
|
Castanea sativa |
Maghemite |
|
| |
Eucalyptus globulus |
|
|
|
|
Ulex europaeus |
|
|
|
|
Pinus pinaster |
|
|
|
|
Sapindus mukorossi |
α-FeOOH α-Fe2O3 β-FeOH |
50 nm |
Rod-like | |
Eucalyptus |
IONPs |
80 nm |
Spherical | |
Black tea |
FeOOH Fe2O3 |
40–50 nm |
Round | |
Mansoa alliacea |
β-Fe2O3 |
18 nm |
| |
Andean blackberry |
Magnetite |
40–70 nm |
Spherical | |
Amaranthus spinosus |
IONPs |
58–530 nm |
Spherical |
(Muthukumar and Matheswaran 2015) |
Eucalyptus |
Fe – p NPs |
40–60 nm |
Cubic | |
Green tea |
Fe – p NPs |
70 nm |
Spherical | |
Eucalyptus tereticornis |
Fe – p NPs |
50–80 nm |
Spherical | |
Melaleuca nesophila |
|
|
|
|
Rosmarinus officinalis |
|
|
|
|
Shirazi thyme |
ZVI & IONPs FeOOH |
40–70 nm |
Spherical | |
Pistachio green |
|
|
|
|
Coffee |
ZVI |
19.6 ± 25.8 nm |
Triangular | |
Green tea |
|
|
|
|
Parthenocissus tricuspi-data |
|
|
|
|
Carob tree |
Magnetite |
5–8 nm |
| |
Passiflora tripartite |
Magnetite |
22.3 ± 3 nm |
Spherical | |
Orange |
ZVI |
3–300 nm |
Spherical | |
Lime |
|
|
Cylindrical |
|
Lemon |
|
|
Irregular |
|
Mandarin |
|
|
|
|
Oolong tea |
ZVI, Fe3O4 FeOOH Fe2O3 |
40–50 nm |
Spherical | |
Camellia sinensis |
FeNPs |
60 nm |
Spherical | |
Syzygium aromaticum |
|
|
|
|
Mentha spicata |
|
|
|
|
Punica granatum juice |
|
|
|
|
Red Wine |
|
|
|
|
Lawsonia inermis |
FeNPs |
21–32 nm |
| |
Gardenia jasminoides |
|
|
|
|
Urtica dioica |
ZVI |
21–71 nm |
Spherical |
(Ebrahiminezhad et al. 2017) |
Rosa damascene |
ZVI |
100 nm |
| |
Thymus vulgaris |
|
|
|
|
Urtica dioica |
|
|
|
|
The pH of reaction solution is always critical factor in the chemical and biochemical reactions. For instance, in the chemical synthesis of magnetite nanoparticles, it is critical to raise the reaction pH near 9–11 to start the formation of magnetite nucleus and growth of magnetite nanoparticles. This extreme pH is usually obtained by using ammonium hydroxide and some other basic compounds such as KOH. Green synthesis is not exceptional, and the pH of the synthesis reaction has an immense effect on the prepared nanoparticles. It has been shown that plant extracts with different pH values provide particles with different characteristics. Acidic extracts provide smaller and more stable nanoparticles in contrast to less acidic or neutral extracts (Makarov et al. 2014b, Njagi et al. 2011). It is believed that capping of the prepared nanoparticles with organic acids such as oxalic acid or citric acid from plant extract resulted in the increase in the zeta potential of prepared particles. It is worth to mention that the zeta potentials more than 25 mV (negative or positive) enhance the colloidal stability of nanostructures (Ebrahiminezhad et al. 2016a).
Figure 3.2 Schematic illustrations for the green synthesis of metallic nanoparticles.
Antioxidant capacity of the plant and plant extract has a significant effect on the nanoparticles synthesis reaction. In the most green synthesis reactions for the fabrication of metal nanoparticles, ionic precursors should be reduced to atoms. Antioxidants are the main reducing agents in the plant extracts. Antioxidant capacity is not the same in various plants, so some plants cannot completely reduce ions to atoms and some others can do (Ebrahiminezhad et al. 2017f, Noruzi and Mousivand 2015, Wang et al. 2014a, b). In general, it is believed that plants with high antioxidant capacity are more efficient for the green synthesis of nanoparticles (Harshiny et al. 2015, Muthukumar and Matheswaran 2015). Antioxidant capacity of the plant extract is also dependent on the plant extract preparation procedure. It has been shown that antioxidant capacity of the plant extract has a direct relation with the ratio of plant powder and solvent which is used for extraction. It means using plant powder in more weight/volume per cent ratio results in the extract with more antioxidant capacity (Harshiny et al. 2015, Machado et al. 2013a, Muthukumar and Matheswaran 2015). Harshiny et al. (2015) have shown that increase in the ration of plant powder and solvent from 5 to 20 w/v % resulted in near threefold increase in the antioxidant capacity of the extract (Harshiny et al. 2015). Showing that by increase in the plant extract concentration, the potential of the extract for the formation of nanoparticles will increase. It also needs to be considered that the overconcentrated plant extract is not suitable for the green synthesis of nanoparticles and there is an optimal value for the plant extract concentration. Ehrampoush et al. have shown that increase in the plant extract concentration from 2 to 6 w/v % resulted in a significant reduction in the particles size from 200 to 50 nm, which is an indicative for increase in the potential of plant extract for the fabrication of nanoparticles. But, further increase in the extract concentration up to 10% resulted in the agglomerated structures (Ehrampoush et al. 2015).
Antioxidant capacity of the plant extract can be evaluated by Folin-Ciocalteu method, ferric reducing antiox-idant power (FRAP), and 2, 2-diphenyl-1-picryl-hydrazyl (DPPH) radical scavenging assay (Benzie and Szeto 1999, Conde et al. 2009, Pulido et al. 2000). Among phytochemi-cals polyphenols, amaranthine, flavonoids, and amino acids were identified as the main antioxidants with key role in the green synthesis of nanoparticles (Harshiny et al. 2015, Machado et al. 2015, 2013a, Muthukumar and Matheswaran 2015).
Amount of plant extract in the green synthesis reaction is another effective parameter. The ratio of plant powder and solvent that is used for green synthesis proposes can vary from 0.2 to 25 w/v % (Cruz et al. 2010, Lukman et al. 2011, Vivekanandhan et al. 2014, Yilmaz et al. 2011). But the most applied concentrations are less than 10% (Ebrahiminezhad et al. 2016b, c, f, g, Goodarzi et al. 2014, He et al. 2013, Sathishkumar et al. 2009, 2010, Song et al. 2009). At these concentrations, increase in the amount of leaf extract in the synthesis reaction usually resulted in the increase in reaction output. Ebrahiminezhad et al. have shown that increase in the amount of Ephedra intermedia stem extract up to 90% volume/volume ratio of the reaction mixture resulted in the increase in the formation of nanoparticles (Ebrahiminezhad et al. 2016f). Similar findings were also reported for the green synthesis reactions using leaf extract of Lippia citriodora (Lemon Verbena), Sorbus aucuparia, and Rosa rugosa; and fruit extract of Tanacetum vulgare and Crataegus douglasii (Cruz et al. 2010, Dubey et al. 2010a, b, c, Ghaffari-Moghaddam and Hadi-Dabanlou 2014). In addition to increase in the formation of nanoparticles, increase in the amount of plant extract has some effects on the size of the prepared particles. Increase in the amount of plant extract resulted in the increase in the total concentration of reducing and capping agents in the reaction mixture, consequently reducing the size of nanoparticles. This effect is reported for Sorbus aucuparia, where increase in leaf extract quantity resulted in the decrease in particle size of both synthesized silver and gold nanoparticles (Dubey et al. 2010a). In another study, steady reduction (from 16 to 13 nm) in the mean particle size is reported by increase in the leaves extract quantity from 5 to 10 mL (Cruz et al. 2010). Increase in the amount of plant extract can also reduce the particle size distribution. Significant effect is reported by Dubey and colleagues in 2010; they found that 4 mL increase in the amount of leaf extract can significantly reduce the particle size distribution from about 20 to 4 nm (Dubey et al. 2010b). As mentioned for the concentration of plant extract, there are also optimal values for the plant extract quantity in the green synthesis reaction. Ebrahiminezhad et al. (2016b) have shown that by increase in the Alcea rosea flower extract quantity up to 40% (volume/volume ratio of total reaction), the concentration of the fabricated particles increased. But, increase in the plant extract quantity more than 40% resulted in a significant hypochromic shift in the surface plasmon resonance (SPR) band of silver nanoparticles which is due to reduction in the concentration of fabricated particles. Also, increase in the amount of extract resulted in the appearance of second absorption peak which was due to the formation of a second population of large particles (Ebrahiminezhad et al. 2016b).
A lot has been done to investigate the effects of reaction time on the green synthesis of nanoparticles. In general, the synthesis of nanoparticles in the bottom-up approach is divided into two main steps: (a) formation of the nuclei and (b) growth of nanostructures (Ebrahiminezhad et al. 2013). The first step is usually occurred suddenly at the beginning of synthesis reaction and then followed by the second stage in which nanostructures grow gradually. Increase in the reaction time usually resulted in the more growth of nanostructures and subsequently bigger particles formation (Ebrahiminezhad et al. 2013, 2015a). This basic premise is also approved for the green synthesis reactions. It is shown that in the green synthesis of silver nanoparticles by using Lippia citriodora (Lemon Verbena) leaf aqueous extract, increase in the reaction time from 3 to 24 h resulted in the 4 nm increase in mean particle size (from 16 to 20 nm) (Cruz et al. 2010).
Green synthesis reactions are usually done at room temperature, and room temperature is ideal for scale-up proposes due to energy concerns and costs (Ebrahiminezhad et al. 2016b, c, f, 2017c, e, f, g). Like all chemical reactions, reaction temperature has a significant effect on the green synthesis of nanoparticles. Increase in the reaction temperature usually resulted in the increase in nanoparticles formation. However, increase in the reaction temperature has a side effect on the characteristics features of the prepared nanoparticles. It has been shown that increase in the reaction temperature, even up to 40°C, can disturb uniformity of the particles and so the produced particles are not in tolerable quality (Ebrahiminezhad et al. 2016b, f). This side effect cannot be seen in all plants; formation of nanoparticles by using sorghum bran extract is increased by increase in the reaction temperature up to even 80° C, without resulting any negative effect on the nanoparticle properties (Njagi et al. 2011).
It also has been shown that temperature of the plant extraction process has significant effect on the synthesized nanoparticles. It has been shown that up to 50°C increase in the temperature in which plant extraction is done resulted in the increase in plant extract antioxidant capacity. But, more increase in the extraction temperature has disruptive effect on the antioxidant capacity. It is believed that high temperatures can degrade antioxidant molecules and reduce the productivity of the resulted extract (Harshiny et al. 2015, Muthukumar and Matheswaran 2015). In addition to extraction temperature, extraction time has also significant effect on the antioxidant properties of the plant extract. Heating the plant materials over a long period can disturb the antioxidant compounds. For instance, in the case of Amaranthus dubius leaf extract preparation, the optimal result was obtained at 45 min extraction time, and more heating resulted in the reduction of antioxidant capacity of the extract.
Green synthesis of nanoparticles can be assisted chemically or physically. In some cases, natural compounds from plant extract have no sufficient power to fabricate nanoparticles, and hence, you need an external power to complete the job. Also, it is possible that you want to fabricate nanoparticles with special characteristics that cannot be achieved simply by using a plant extract. In some cases, plant extract is used just as a source of natural coating materials and capping agents, and hence, the formation of nanoparticles should be driven by another source. This external source can be a chemical agent such as a powerful reducing agent or agents that are used for the chemical synthesis of nanoparticles. Also, fabrication of nanoparticles can be enhanced by using physical treatments, mostly irradiation. In the following, we explain these two techniques for the assisted green synthesis of nanoparticles.
Some scientists have employed the benefits of plant extract in the chemical reactions. It means that they do their typical synthesis reaction in the presence of plant extract. It is believed that biochemical molecules in the plant extract can act as stabilizer for even chemically synthesized nanoparticles. This idea is not strange, because using biologic molecules as stabilizer for chemically synthesized nanoparticles is a routine approach for the fabrication of biocompatible and stable nanoparticles. In this technique, chemical reactions are conducted in the presence of a define biomolecule such as amino acids (Ebrahiminezhad et al. 2012b, 2013). The biomolecule acts as a capping agent and engulfs the prepared particles, making the particles biocompatible and stable (Ebrahiminezhad et al. 2012b, 2013, Gholami et al. 2015, Raee et al. 2018). Semi-green synthesis is similar to this approach except that in the semi-green synthesis, the chemical reaction is done in the presence of a mixture of biomolecules from plant extract. Because of the use of a chemical agent in the reaction process, the chemical-assisted green synthesis is also called semi-green synthesis (Ebrahiminezhad et al. 2017g). In practice, a typical semi-green synthesis reaction is done by the addition of a chemical agent to the mixture of plant extract and metal ions which used as precursor for nanoparticles.
Chemical agents which can be used for the semi-green synthesis of different nanoparticles vary depending on the proposed nanoparticles. For instance, in the case of iron oxide and iron oxide-hydroxide nanoparticles, the chemical synthesis is done at alkaline pH (9–11). This pH is usually achieved by using ammonium hydroxide (NH4OH), potassium hydroxide (KOH), and sodium hydroxide (NaOH). Also, other alkaline agents such as sodium oleate and 1,6-hexanediamine (H2N(CH2)6NH2) were used. Hence, these compounds are applicable for the semi-green synthesis of iron oxide and iron oxide-hydroxide nanoparticles in the presence of plant extract (Iida et al. 2007, Park et al. 2004, Raee et al. 2018, Singh et al. 2014b).
Since now, semi-green synthesis of different iron-based nanoparticles has been done using a various series of plants. For instance, magnetite (Fe3O4) nanoparticles with super-paramagnetic properties can be synthesized by employing aqueous or organic extract of Passiflora tripartite, Andean blackberry (Rubus glaucus), Mimosa pudica, tangerine peel extract, carob leaf, and watermelon rind powder (Awwad and Salem 2012a, Ehrampoush et al. 2015, Kumar et al. 2014a, 2016a, Prasad et al. 2016). In this regard, iron salts such as ferrous sulphate (FeSO4), ferrous chloride (FeCl3), and ferric chloride (FeCl2) are used as iron precursor. The reaction is started by increasing the pH up to extreme alkaline using sodium hydroxide (NaOH) or ammonium hydroxide (NH4OH) (Ehrampoush et al. 2015, Kumar et al. 2014a, 2016a, Prasad et al. 2016). Iron (III) oxide (Fe2O3) and iron (III) oxide-hydroxide (FeOOH) nanoparticles were also synthesized by using extracts of Sapindus mukorossi (raw reetha), Omani mango tree, Garlic Vine (Mansoa alli-acea), and Amaranthus dubius. Ferric salts such as ferric chloride and ferric nitrate Fe(NO3)3 were used as the source of iron, and usually, sodium hydroxide was used to boost the reaction (Al-Ruqeishi et al. 2016, Harshiny et al. 2015, Jassal et al. 2016, Prasad 2016).
Semi-green synthesis was also used for the synthesis of other nanoparticles such as silver nanoparticles. In the common chemical synthesis approaches, conversion of silver ions to silver nanoparticles is done by using chemical agents such as sodium borohydride, sodium citrate, ammonium hydroxide, and ethanol (Ebrahimi et al. 2016a, b, Mehr et al. 2015, Pal et al. 2009). Prepared silver nanoparticles via these classic reactions can be stabilized by performing the reaction in the presence of plant extract. Since now, semi-green synthesized silver nanoparticles have been fabricated by using pomegranate and Camellia sinensis (tea plant) peel extract (Logeswari et al. 2015, Nasiriboroumand et al. 2018). Also leave extracts of Ocimum tenuiflorum, Solanum trilobatum (thoothuvalai), Syzygium cumini (Java plum or black plum or jamun), and Centella asiatica (gotu kola) were used (Logeswari et al. 2015, Nasiriboroumand et al. 2018).
This technique employs physical treatments in the presence of plant extract to boost the green synthesis reactions. In contrast to semi-green synthesis which uses chemical agents in the presence of plant extract, physically assisted green synthesis is more green and sustainable as no chemical agent is used and no harmful waste is produced. This technique is mostly done by irradiation and so-called radiation-assisted green synthesis. Radiations by sunlight, microwave, and ultrasound waves are the most common physical treatments which have been used for the green synthesis of nanoparticles and are explained in detail in the following.
Sunlight is the most used irradiation for the light-assisted green synthesis of nanoparticles. Sunlight irradiation is varying throughout a day, and hence, the characteristic feature of nanoparticles which are synthesized at different time periods of the day can be different (Prathna et al. 2014). Difference in the sunlight intensity through a day also has impacts on the speed of the reaction. Increase in the irradiation intensity can speed up the synthesis reaction. So, midday irradiation is providing the fastest reaction. It is obvious that geographical location is another significant parameter. For instance, an investigation which is performed in India demonstrated that sunlight irradiation at 12 PM increases the reaction rate more than irradiation at 10 AM and 2 PM (Prathna et al. 2014). Depending on the employed plant extract and sunlight intensity, there is an optimal exposure time for sunlight-assisted green synthesis, and long-time irradiation can disturb the quality of prepared particles. The optimal irradiation time is depending on the employed plant extract. It has been shown that, by applying lemon (Citrus limon) or Polyalthia longifolia extract for the synthesis of silver nanoparticles, it takes about 20–35 min to reach the absorption maxima. However, while using Aloe vera leaves extract, the maximum of SPR band is obtained just in 10 min (Kumar et al. 2016b, Moosa et al. 2015, Prathna et al. 2014).
Another approach for the fast synthesis of nanoparticles using plant extract is microwave-assisted synthesis. This technique is performed simply by employing domestic microwave ovens. Microwave irradiation can increase the rate of nanoparticles formation so that a typical green synthesis reaction can perform in just few minutes or even less than 1 min (Ali et al. 2015, Joseph and Mathew 2015). But, this technique is not functional using all plant extracts. Kahrilas and his colleagues (2014) have evaluated the potential of citrus fruits (orange, grapefruit, tangelo, lemon, and lime) for the green synthesis of silver nanoparticles using microwave technology. The only successful experiment was done by using orange peel extract (Kahrilas et al. 2014). Since now, this technique was employed for the green synthesis of silver nanoparticles using various plants such as Phyllanthus niruri L, Biophytum sensi-tivum, Elephantopus scaber, and Eucalyptus globulus (Ali et al. 2015, Francis et al. 2018, Haris et al. 2017, Joseph and Mathew 2015). Copper nanoparticles were also synthesized via this technique by using potato starch, piper nigrum seeds extract, Solanum Lycopersicum (tomato) fruit extract, coffee powder extract, and leaves extract of black tea and Polygonum minus (Sirisha and Asthana 2018, Sun et al. 2014, Suresh et al. 2014, Sutradhar et al. 2014, Tanghatari et al. 2017, Ullah et al. 2018).
The microwave-assisted synthesis of Al2O3 NPs by using Cymbopogon citratus leaf extract was proposed by Ansari et al. [64]. In this experiment, aluminium nitrate (Al(NO3)3) solution was used as the metal precursor. The aluminium salt solution was added to the aqueous extract of C. citratus with a ratio of 1:4 at room temperature. The mixture was then subjected to microwave irradiation at 540 W until a colour change happened. It was found that the fabricated nanoparticles ranged from 9 to 180 nm in size (Ansari et al. 2015).
Ultrasound is another physical treatment which can be used to intensify a green synthesis reaction. It has been shown that a green synthesis reaction can be performed faster when irradiated with ultrasonic waves. Kothai and Jayanthi have shown that Camellia sinensis extract that is fortified with lemon juice and honey can convert silver ions to silver nanoparticles in 15 min. But, if the reaction is performed under ultrasonic irradiation, it takes only 5 min for the change in colour and appearance of reddish brown colour that is an indicative for the formation of nanoparticles (Kothai and Jayanthi 2014). Similar results were reported for the fabrication of silver nanoparticles using weed plant Lantana camara L. leaf extract. In a typical green synthesis procedure using Lantana camara L. leaf extract, it takes 1 h to fabricate silver nanoparticles. Interestingly, by applying ultrasonication, the colour development and appearance of reddish brown colour can be observed within just 10 min (Manjamadha and Muthukumar 2016). This technique was also used for the synthesis of other nanoparticles such as gold nanoparticles (Babu et al. 2012).
The major disadvantage in the plant-mediated synthesis is anisotropic and non-uniform growth of the particles. Hence, one of the recent innovations to improve quality of the green synthesized nanoparticles is to employ some additional molecules (additives) such as surfactants (Khan et al. 2012a, b). The presence of various additive compounds in the reaction mixture has different effects on the synthesized nanoparticles such as creating desirable shape, capping the particles, increasing stability, and size control (Cao et al. 2016, Pandian and Palanivel 2016).
β-Cyclodextrin (βCD) is one of the well-employed molecules in this order. Zhuang et al. (2015) investigated the effect of βCD on morphology and reactivity of synthesized nanoparticles. They indicated that the addition of βCD to the reaction mixture resulted in a decrease in the particle size from 60 to 20 nm (Zhuang et al. 2015). In another study, it has been shown that Ag nanoparticles with desirable morphology can be obtained by adding suitable amount of cetyltrimethylammonium bromide (CTAB) to the synthesis reaction. In addition to shape directing role, CTAB is also able to increase the reactivity of phytochemicals to reduce Ag+ ions (Khan et al. 2012b). All surfactants cannot play controlling role in the green synthesis reaction. For instance, sodium dodecyl sulphate (SDS) has no significant effect on the green synthesis of silver nanoparticles by using Paan (Piper betle) leaf petiole extract (Khan et al. 2012a).
Iron-based nanoparticles are one of the most studied and employed nanostructures in various fields of science and technology. Naturally, iron has different states of oxidation with different physicochemical properties. So, nanostructures of iron in various oxidation states pose unique properties which make them suitable for specific applications. Since now, a lot has been done to fabricate iron-based nanoparticles using green synthesis approach as tabulated in Table 3.1. Attempts for the green synthesis of various iron-based nanoparticles are explained in the following sections.
Zero-valent iron (ZVI) possess incompletely filled d-orbitals whit the electron donor activity that makes them highly reactive. ZVI nanoparticles have a great potential for remediation proposes and wide applications in various environmental and industrial processes (Wang and Zhang 1997). In order to fabricate ZVI nanoparticles, we need to reduce iron ions into the zero-valent state. Since now, phytochemicals in the leaves extract from various plants such as Rosa damascene, Thymus vulgaris, Urtica dioica, Azadirachta indica (Neem), grape marc, black tea, vine leaves, Psidium guajava (Guava), Cupressus sempervirens (Mediterranean cypress), Urtica dioica, and 26 other different tree species have been shown to be able to do this (Ebrahiminezhad et al. 2017d, f, Fazlzadeh et al. 2017, Machado et al. 2013a, b, Pattanayak and Nayak 2013, Somchaidee and Tedsree 2018).
There are various phytochemicals in the plant extract that were reported to be capable to reduce metal ions and stabilize the nanoparticles (Mittal et al. 2013). But, reactivity of the prepared nanoparticles depends on the biochemical molecules in the plant extract. For instance, Machado et al. (2013b) have shown that extracts of black tea, grape marc, and vine leaves are able to produce ZVI nanoparticles with different reactivity capacity. Different phyto-chemical components in the plant extracts lead to significant impact on the morphology, reactivity, and agglomeration tendency of the prepared nanoparticles (Machado et al. 2015, 2013a). Green tea extract is also reported to be capable to synthesize spherical ZVI nanoparticles (5-15 nm) from a ferric nitrate solution. The produced nanoparticles showed a good efficiency in degradation and removal of organic contaminations such as bromothymol blue (Hoag et al. 2009).
Magnetite nanoparticles have important multifunctional properties such as small size, high magnetism, low toxi-city, and microwave absorption properties (Belachew et al. 2017). During the last years, these nanoparticles have gained immense interest by researchers from various fields such as physics, chemistry, medicine, biology, and material sciences. These particles are promising candidate for diverse medical and biological applications such as targeted drug delivery, hyperthermia, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), cell labelling, and magnetic immobilization (Ebrahiminezhad et al. 2016i, 2015b, Yang et al. 2008).
Nowadays, the literature is replete with investigations that utilize the green synthesis as a novel method for the production of magnetite nanoparticles. In this regard, various plant extracts such as Syzygium cumini seed extract, plantain peel extract, Tannin extract of Acacia mearnsii, Rambutan peel waste extract, and fruit extract of Cynometra ramiflora and Couroupita guianensis have been used (Bishnoi et al. 2018, Khan et al. 2015, Sathishkumar et al. 2018, Venkateswarlu et al. 2013, Yuvakkumar and Hong 2014). In addition, leaves extract of Annona squamosal, Albizia adianthifolia, Hordeum vulgare, and Rumex acetosa was also employed (Makarov et al. 2014b, Sulaiman et al. 2018b, Vanitha et al. 2017).
Different plant extracts provide particles with different colloidal stability. For example, nanoparticles which synthesized by using H. vulgare leaf extract were colloidally unstable and were susceptible to aggregation. But, particles which produced by Rumex acetosa extract were highly stable. The higher stability of nanoparticles synthesized by R. acetosa extracts can be due to the presence of organic acids (such oxalic or citric acids) in the plant extract which can act as stabilizer on the surface of the particles (Makarov et al. 2014b).
Iron (III) oxide (Fe2O3) nanoparticles are one of the most interesting and potentially useful iron nanostructures. Based on the crystal structure, iron (III) oxides are divided into four different types including α-Fe2O3 (hematite), γ-Fe2O3 (maghemite), β-Fe2O3, and ε-Fe2O3. Each of these types possesses unique physicochemical features which make them suitable for specific technical and biomedical applications (Machala et al. 2011).
Nagajyothi et al. (2017) were synthesized hematite nanoparticles by using Psoralea corylifolia seeds extract. Obtained nanoparticles were crystalline with about 40 nm in diameter and showed efficient catalytic activity for degradation of methylene blue dye. The authors employed prepared particles for industrial wastewater treatment and as anticancer agent against renal tumour cells (Nagajyothi et al. 2017).
One comparative study reported the successful synthesis of maghemite nanoparticles by using chestnut tree (Castanea sativa), eucalyptus (Eucalyptus globulus), gorse (Ulex europaeus), and pine (Pinus pinaster) extracts. The authors selected E. globulus as the best choice for green synthesis of iron (III) oxide nanoparticles (Martínez-Cabanas et al. 2016). Iron (III) oxide nanoparticles were also reported to be synthesized by using leaves extract of Ailanthus excels and Anacardium occidentales (Asoufi et al. 2018, Rufus et al. 2017). Fruit extract of Cynometra ramiflora and seeds extract of Psoralea corylifolia are the other examples (Bishnoi et al. 2018, Nagajyothi et al. 2017). Aloe vera, green tea, oolong tea, and black tea were also reported to be applicable for the synthesis of iron (III) oxide nanoparticles (Huang et al. 2014a, Mukherjee et al. 2016).
Iron oxyhydroxides possess four different polymorphs, namely goethite (α-FeOOH), akaganéite (β-FeOOH), lepidocrocite (γ-FeOOH), and feroxyhyte (δ-FeOOH). Nanoparticles of FeOOH are one of the most interesting candidates for air and water pollution removal (Ebrahiminezhad et al. 2017g). These nanoparticles are attracting increasing interest due to their significant properties such as biocompatibility, excellent visible light absorption, and high photostability (Jelle et al. 2016).
Iron oxyhydroxide nanoparticles can be synthesized by various physicochemical methods, but in recent years, green synthesis approaches have been developed. Since now, the utilization of Sorghum bran, green tea, black tea, and oolong tea extract has been reported for the synthesis of FeOOH nanoparticles (Kuang et al. 2013, Njagi et al. 2011). Also, the use of blueberry leaf extract was efficient for the synthesis of lepidocrocite (γ-FeOOH) nanoparticles (Manquián-Cerda et al. 2017).
In some cases, reaction between iron ions and polyphenol compounds from plant extract resulted in the formation of nanostructures of iron and organic compounds, which are called iron complex nanoparticles. In fact, polyphenols in plant extracts have redox potential which can easily reduce gold and silver ions to gold and silver nanoparticles but are not capable to reduce iron ions to ZVI as well as chelate ferric ions to produce the iron-polyphenols complex nanoparticles (Wang et al. 2015). It has been shown that polyphenols from Eucalyptus tereticornis, Melaleuca nesophila, Rosmarinus officinalis, Salvia officinalis, and green tea are able to form nanoparticles of iron complexes (Markova et al. 2014, Wang 2013, 2015, 2014c).
These nanostructures have excellent organic dye adsorption-flocculation capacity and gained applications in water purification and contaminated ground water remediation (Wang et al. 2013). In addition, iron complex nanoparticles can act as a heterogeneous Fenton-like catalyst for decolonization proposes that makes them useful for environmental remediation (Wang et al. 2014c). Markova et al. (2014) showed that nanoparticles of iron complexes produced by green tea extract have remarkable ecotoxicological impacts on the aquatic organism (Markova et al. 2014). This toxic effect can be due to the generation of noxious radicals attributed to Fe2+ ions released from complexes of green tea polyphenols. Hence, the use of these materials in remediation processes where aquatic organisms are present should be considered (Markova et al. 2014).
Silver (Ag) nanoparticles are one of the most studied and applied nanoparticles in science and technology. Silver has gained historical applications in the human communities since ancient time (Ebrahiminezhad et al. 2016e). As a potent antimicrobial agent, the silver cations were used in burns, wounds, and ulcer treatments. As early as 4,000 B.C.E, silver was known to the Chaldeans. Silver colloids have gained medical applications even before discovering microbial life as the causative agent for infectious disease. Romans and Egyptians were found silver compounds as functional food preservative. Also, Hippocrates and Macedonians employed silver to prevent and treat wound infections. They found silver-based compounds as potent compound not just against infections but also as a wound-healing agent (Ebrahiminezhad et al. 2016e). Discovering and application of antibiotics as a potent antimicrobial agent, in the early 1940s, with very light side effects drove ancient silver away from the spotlight. Nowadays by emerging resistance strains, silver is back in a novel structure known as “nanosilver”. Vast investigations about the biological and antimicrobial properties of nanosilver, the mechanism behind it, and the fabrication of silver nanoparticles have been done (Ebrahiminezhad et al. 2016a, e). Like other nanostructures, the physical and chemical approaches were the first methods for silver nanoparticles fabrication (Ebrahimi et al. 2016a, b). But, by increase in the commercial and scientific applications of silver nanoparticles, the demand for this nanostructure was increased significantly. Hence, the production techniques were shifted to the sustainable process and so many investigations were done to fabricate silver nanoparticles in green manner using microorganisms and plants (Ebrahiminezhad et al. 2016a, b).
Since now, a lot has been done to facilitate the production of silver nanoparticles by plant-mediated synthesis (Table 3.2), and diverse parts of plants have been used for this purpose. Leaf extract is the most employed part, and the potential of various plant leaf extracts such as Artemisia annua, Lippia citriodora (Lemon Verbena), Lantana camara, Zataria multiflora, Cupressus semper-virens (Mediterranean Cypress), maple (Acer sp.), green and black tea, and eucalyptus has been evaluated (Ajitha et al. 2015, Basavegowda et al. 2014, Cataldo 2014, Cruz et al. 2010, Ebrahiminezhad et al. 2016g, Manjamadha and Muthukumar 2016, Mo et al. 2015, Nakhjavani et al. 2017, Vivekanandhan et al. 2014). In addition to leaves, the extract of plant other parts was also employed such as Alcea rosea and Matricaria chamomilla flower extract (Ebrahiminezhad et al. 2016b, c), Ephedra intermedia stem extract (Ebrahiminezhad et al. 2016f), Cinnamon zeylan-icum bark extract (Sathishkumar et al. 2009), and Curcuma longa tuber extract (Sathishkumar et al. 2010).
Plant Name |
Plant’s Part |
Precursor |
Reported NPs Size |
Shape |
Responsible Biomolecules |
References |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Catharanthus roseus Linn |
Leaf |
AgNO3 |
35–55 nm |
Spherical |
– | |
Desmodium triflorura |
Leaf |
AgNO3 |
5–20 nm |
Spherical, oval, and elliptical |
Proteins and heterocyclic compounds | |
Acalypha indica |
Leaf |
AgNO3 |
20–30 nm |
Spherical |
Quercetin | |
Cinnamomum camphora |
Leaf |
AgNO3 |
5–40 nm |
Quasi-spherical |
Polyols and heterocyclic compounds | |
Coleus aromaticus |
Leaf |
AgNO3 |
40–50 nm |
Spherical |
Alcohols and polyphenols | |
Coriandrum sativum |
Leaf |
AgNO3 |
8–75 nm |
Spherical |
– | |
Gliricidia sepium |
Leaf |
AgNO3 |
10–50 nm |
Spherical |
– | |
Citrus limon |
Leaf |
AgNO3 |
15–30 nm |
Multi shape |
Citric acid | |
Lippia citriodora |
Leaf |
AgNO3 |
15–30 nm |
Spherical |
Isoverbascosie | |
Parthenium |
Leaf |
AgNO3 |
30–80 nm |
Irregular |
– | |
Rosa rugosa |
Leaf |
AgNO3 |
Average size of 12 nm |
Spherical, triangular, and hexagonal |
Amines and alcohols | |
|
Leaf |
AgNO3 |
22–40 nm |
Spherical |
Polyphenols | |
Elaeagnus indica |
Leaf |
AgNO3 |
Average size of —30 nm |
Spherical |
– | |
Chenopodium album |
Leaf |
AgNO3 |
10–30 nm |
Spherical |
– | |
|
Leaf |
AgNO3 |
9—15 nm |
Spherical |
– | |
Bixa orellana |
Leaf |
AgNO3 |
35—65 nm |
Spherical and cubic |
Phenols, tannins, and terpenoids | |
Elaeagnus latifolia |
Leaf |
AgNO3 |
5—30 nm |
Spherical |
– | |
Nerium oleander |
Leaf |
AgNO3 |
48–67 nm |
Cubic |
Polyphenols | |
Ocimum bacillicum |
Leaf |
AgNO3 |
58–89 nm |
Spherical with a few agglomeration |
Terpenoids and proteins | |
Odina wodier |
Leaf |
AgNO3 |
5—30 nm |
Spherical |
Unsaturated carbonyl groups | |
Ceratonia siliqua |
Leaf |
AgNO3 |
5–40 nm |
Spherical |
Protein | |
Juglans regia L. |
Leaf |
AgNO3 |
10–50 nm |
Quasi-spherical |
– | |
Datura metel |
Leaf |
AgNO3 |
6—40 nm |
Spherical and ellipsoidal |
Alcoholic components | |
Euphorbia hirta |
Leaf |
AgNO3 |
40–50 nm |
Spherical |
– | |
|
Leaf |
AgNO3 |
– |
Spherical |
Proteins | |
Chromolaena odorata |
Leaf |
AgNO3 |
40–70 nm |
Hexagonal |
Flavonoids, alkaloids, and polyphenols | |
Coleus amboinicus |
Leaf |
AgNO3 |
25.83 ± 0.78 nm |
– |
– | |
Sonchus asper |
Leaf |
AgNO3 |
– |
– |
– | |
Piper nigrum |
Leaf |
AgNO3 |
19.7–82 nm |
Spherical |
– | |
Azadirachta indica |
Leaf |
AgNO3 |
21.07 nm |
– |
– | |
Murraya paniculata |
Leaf |
AgNO3 |
20–50 nm |
Spherical |
Unsaturated carbonyl groups | |
Albizia adianthifolia |
Leaf |
AgNO3 |
4–35 nm |
Spherical |
Saponins, proteins, and sugars | |
Anacardium occidentale |
Leaf |
AgNO3 |
Average size of 15.5 nm |
Spherical |
Proteins, aromatic amines, and polyphenols | |
Annona squamosa |
Leaf |
AgNO3 |
20–100 nm |
Spherical |
Phenols, proteins, and carbohydrates | |
Chrysopogon zizanioides |
Leaf |
AgNO3 |
85–110 nm |
Roughly cubic |
Alkaloids and phytosterols | |
Coccinia grandis |
Leaf |
AgNO3 |
20–30 nm |
Spherical |
Alkaloids and terpenoids | |
|
Leaf |
AgNO3 |
10–80 nm |
Spherical, hexahedral, oval, and truncated triangle |
– | |
Zataria multiflora |
Leaf |
AgNO3 |
16.3–25.4 nm |
Spherical |
Carbohydrate | |
Ficus carica |
Leaf and Bark |
AgNO3 |
10–20 nm |
– |
Organic acids | |
Phyllanthus amarus |
Whole plant |
AgNO3 |
24 ± 8 nm size |
Spherical |
– | |
Nyctanthes arbortristis |
Seed |
AgNO3 |
50–80 nm |
Spherical |
– | |
Solanum xanthocarpum |
Fruit |
AgNO3 |
45–80 nm |
Spherical |
– | |
Vitis vinifera |
Fruit |
AgNO3 |
30–40 nm |
Spherical |
– | |
Ipomoea indica |
Flower |
AgNO3 |
10–50 nm |
Spherical and cubic |
– | |
|
Flower |
AgNO3 |
Average size of 14 nm |
Spherical, tetrahedron, elongated decahedron, and fivefold twinned structure |
Retinoic acid and proteins | |
Calotropis procera |
Flower |
AgNO3 |
Average size of 45 nm |
Cubic |
– | |
Cassia auriculata |
Flower |
AgNO3 |
10–40 nm |
Spherical |
– | |
Millingtonia hortensis |
Flower |
AgNO3 |
10–40 nm |
Spherical |
– | |
Alcea rosea |
Flower |
AgNO3 |
Average size of 7.2 nm |
Spherical |
Oxygen-bearing functional groups | |
Matricaria chamomilla |
Flower |
AgNO3 |
1.6—3.1 nm |
Spherical |
Carbohydrates and oxygen-bearing functional groups | |
Rhododendron dauricam |
Flower |
AgNO3 |
25–40 nm |
– |
Phenolics, flavanones, or | |
|
|
|
|
|
terpenoids |
|
Euphorbia nivulia |
Latex |
AgNO3 |
5—10 nm |
Spherical |
Euphol and Proteins | |
Jatropha curcas |
Latex |
AgNO3 |
20—30 nm with larger |
Mostly spherical with particles |
Cyclic peptides uneven shapes for larger particles | |
|
Latex |
AgNO3 |
Multiple size |
Round shape |
Proteins, flavonoids, and terpenoids | |
Boswellia ovalifoliolata |
Stem and Bark |
AgNO3 |
30–40 nm |
Spherical |
– | |
Breynia rhamnoides |
Stem |
AgNO3 |
Average size of 64 nm |
– |
Phenolic glycosides | |
Ephedra intermedia |
Stem |
AgNO3 |
10—36 nm |
Spherical |
Carbohydrates | |
Annona squamosa |
Peel |
AgNO3 |
20–60 nm |
Irregular spherical |
Water-soluble hydroxy functional group containing compounds | |
Citrus sinensis |
Peel |
AgNO3 |
35 ± 2 nm at 25°C & |
Spherical |
Water-soluble fractions | |
|
|
|
10 ± 1 nm at 60°C |
|
|
|
Trachyspermum ararai |
Seed |
AgNO3 |
Varied in size with majority having 87nm and few in 176, 320 and 988 nm |
Triangular |
Essential oils | |
|
Seed |
AgNO3 |
3.2–7.6 μm |
Spherical |
Alkaloids | |
Syzygium cumini |
Leaf, leaf water fraction, seed, and seed water fraction |
AgNO3 |
Average size of 30, 29, 92, and 73 nm |
Spherical |
Polyphenols | |
Rumex hymenosepalus |
Root |
AgNO3 |
2–40 nm |
Face-centred cubic, and hexagonal |
Polyphenols | |
Trianthema decandra |
Root |
AgNO3 |
36–74 nm |
Spherical |
Saponins | |
Boswellia serrata |
Gum |
AgNO3 |
7.5 ± 3.8 nm |
Spherical |
Hydroxyl and carbonyl groups of gum |
Very little work has been performed to understand the exact mechanism behind the plant-mediated synthesis of silver nanoparticles. Various biomolecules including enzymes, proteins, carbohydrates, vitamins, alkaloids, phenolic acids, terpenoids, and polyphenols are the main components in plant extracts that play an important role in the bioreduction of silver ions to silver nanoparticles (Ebrahimi et al. 2016a, b, c, f, g, 2017c). Silver nanoparticles have a high surface energy state that makes them less stable and prone to aggregation in colloidal systems. Functional groups of the plant metabolites such as carbonyl groups have the potential to bind to the silver nanoparticles and prevent agglomeration. Thus, it is suggested that the biological components of plant extracts could be involved in reduction, formation, and stabilization of silver nanoparticles (Ahmed et al. 2016, Makarov et al. 2014a).
It has been shown that some factors including plant source, concentration of initial silver ions, and reaction conditions such as temperature, pH, and time are the key factors in the biosynthesis of silver nanoparticles using plant extracts. These factors have significant impacts on physicochemical characteristics of the produced particles (Chung et al. 2016).
The simplicity of using plant extract for reducing a metal salt has also led to a massive investigation for the fabrication of gold nanoparticles. Apart from the applications in DNA labelling, drug delivery, and biosensors, gold nanoparticles have been known for the antimicrobial activity against human and animal pathogens (Mittal et al. 2013). As shown in Figure 3.3, gold nanoparticles can also serve as catalyst for the reduction of nitro compounds such as 4-nitrophenol (4-NP) to 4-aminophenol (4-AP) (Ghosh et al. 2012). A single-step procedure for plant-mediated gold nanoparticles preparation has attracted much attention as it is a rapid, cost-efficient, environment-friendly, and safe for clinical practices. In this approach, the plant extract is responsible for the bioreduction of Au ions, their growth, and stabilization (Mittal et al. 2013).
Many phytochemical compounds have been reported to be present in different parts of plants which can act as a reducing agent for the reduction of Au3+ ions to gold nanoparticles. Gold nanoparticles can be synthesized into various shapes such as nano-sphere, nano-rod, nano-star, nano-triangular, nano-cage, nao-prism, nano-plate, and nano-belt. Variation in the shape and size of the prepared particles results in the production of nanoparticles with different physicochemical properties (Ganeshkumar et al. 2012). Shape and size are among the most important features for gold nanoparticles to modulate the optical properties in electronic and sensor applications and to minimize any potential toxic side effects in biomedical and biological purposes (Shankar et al. 2005). Huang et al. (2007) reported that Au ions can be reduced to triangular or spherical shaped nanoparticles using leaf extract of Cinnamomum camphora at ambient temperature. It was noted that the formation of nanoparticles by C. camphora strongly relies on the dosage of the plant extract dried biomass. Biochemical compounds such as terpenoids, flavones, and polysaccha-rides in the C. camphora biomass can act as capping agent for the fabricated nanoparticles. Once the biomass concentration increased from 0.5 to 1 g, the interaction between biomolecules present in plant extract and the surface of nanoparticles led to a size reduction. Since now, various parts of different plants such as root, pod, peel, leaf, tuber, flower, fruit, and seed have been used for the green synthesis of gold nanoparticles. These data are provided in detail in Table 3.3 along with the resulted particles size and shape.
Figure 3.3 Catalytic activity of gold nanoparticles for reduction of 4-nitrophenol (4-NP) into 4-aminophenol (4-AP).
Among metallic nanoparticles, zinc oxide (ZnO) nanoparticles have attracted much attention because they are non-toxic and hygroscopic. These properties make them a potent material for applications as a catalyst in many organic transformations and in optics and sensors (Madhumitha et al. 2016, Roopan and Khan 2010). In this section, the plant-mediated synthesis of ZnO nanoparticles is discussed. Zinc salts such as zinc nitrate, zinc acetate, and zinc sulphate are the most applied zinc precursor. Biochemical reduction of zinc ions starts when the plant extract is mixed with zinc salt aqueous solution and a change in the colour of the reaction mixture is an indication of nanoparticles formation. Once the nanoparticles formed, they are harvested by using centrifugation and kept in an oven for drying.
Plant Name |
Plant Part Used for Extract |
Precursor |
Reported NPs Size |
Shape |
Reference |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Chenopodium album |
Leaf |
HAuCl4 |
10–30 nm |
Quasi-spherical | |
Cinnamomum camphora |
Leaf |
HAuCl4 |
10–40 nm |
Triangular or spherical | |
Coriander |
Leaf |
HAuCl4 |
6.75–57.91 nm |
Spherical, triangle, truncated triangle, and decahedral | |
Pogostemon benghalensis |
Leaf |
HAuCl4 |
10–50 nm |
Spherical and triangular | |
Nerium oleander |
Leaf |
HAuCl4 |
2–10 nm |
Spherical | |
Lemongrass |
Leaf |
HAuCl4 |
– |
Triangular and hexagonal | |
Rosa rugosa |
Leaf |
HAuCl4 |
11 nm |
Spherical, triangular, and hexagonal | |
Terminalia Catappa |
Leaf |
HAuCl4 |
10–35 nm |
Spherical | |
Centella asiatica |
Leaf |
HAuCl4 |
2–24 nm |
Spherical, triangular, and hexagonal | |
Mangifera indica |
Leaf |
HAuCl4 |
17–20 nm |
Spherical | |
Memecylon umbellatum |
Leaf |
HAuCl4 |
15–25 nm |
Spherical, hexagonal, and triangular | |
Memecylon edule |
Leaf |
HAuCl4 |
10–45 nm |
Triangular, spherical, and hexagonal | |
Cassia auriculata |
Leaf |
HAuCl4 |
15–25 nm |
Triangular and spherical | |
Salix alba |
Leaf |
HAuCl4 |
50–80 nm |
Spherical | |
Pear |
Fruit |
HAuCl4 |
200–500 nm |
Triangular and hexagonal | |
Gymnocladus assamicus |
Pod |
HAuCl4 |
4.5 ± 0.23 to 22.5 ± 1.24 nm |
Hexagonal, pentagonal, and triangular | |
Dioscorea bulbifera |
Tuber |
HAuCl4 |
11–30 nm and 50–300 nm |
Spherical and triangular | |
Mucuna pruriens |
Seed |
HAuCl4 |
6–17.7 nm |
Spherical | |
Abelmoschus esculentus |
Seed |
HAuCl4 |
45–75 nm |
Spherical | |
Mango (Mangifera indica Linn) |
Peel |
HAuCl4 |
6.03 ± 2.77 to 18.01 ± 3.67 nm |
Spherical | |
Panax ginseng |
Root |
HAuCl4 |
10–40 nm |
Spherical | |
Morinda citrifolia L. |
Root |
HAuCl4 |
12.14–38.26 nm |
Spherical and triangular | |
Achillea wilhelmsii |
Flower |
HAuCl4 |
70 nm |
Spherical | |
Nyctanthes arbortristis |
Flower |
HAuCl4 |
19.8 ± 5.0 nm |
Triangular, pentagonal, rod shaped, and spherical | |
Lonicera Japonica |
Flower |
HAuCl4 |
8.02 nm |
Triangular and tetrahedral | |
Curcuma mangga |
– |
HAuCl4 |
2–35 nm |
Spherical |
The size and the morphology of fabricated nanoparticles are among the most important features that can influence their effectiveness in different applications. Table 3.4 illustrates the characteristics of ZnO nanoparticles fabricated using different plant parts. Similar to the chemical approaches for the nanoparticles synthesis, there are different factors that can affect the nanoparticles size. The morphological structure of nanoparticles has a significant effect in controlling the physical, chemical, electrical, and optical characteristics of them (Edison and Sethuraman 2012). It has been reported that the concentration of plant extract as well as the reaction temperature, pH, and time plays a key role in changing of the nanoparticles size, morphology, and quality. In this context, the scientists have attempted to modify the biosynthesis process and optimize the nanoparticle synthesis process by determining the optimal levels of effective variables. For instance, it was shown that the increase in the concentration of plant extract results in a reduction of nanoparticle size (Fu and Fu 2015). Anbuvannan et al. (2015a) found that the increase in the concentration of Anisochilus carnosus leaf extract from 30 to 50 mL leads to a 31% decrease in particle size while having no significant effect on the morphology of fabricated particles. The same observation was noticed by Elumalai et al. (2015) when the authors used various concentrations of leaf extract from Vitex trifolia. Due to the polarity and electrostatic attraction, the nanoparticles tend to agglomerate when a lower concentration of plant extract as a capping agent is used. However, the binding of smaller size nanoparticles which causes the formation of secondary bulk nanoparticles is responsible for agglomeration at the higher volume of leaf extract. Likewise, studies have shown that the changes in the pH of reaction solution result in the fabrication of nanoparticles with different shapes and sizes. It has been reported that a lower pH contributes to the commemoration of large particles (Dubey et al. 2010c). A higher pH has reported as a favourable condition for the formation of smaller metallic nanoparticles (Armendariz et al. 2004). The variation in particle size is due to the accessibility of functional groups at different pH levels during particles nucleation (Shah et al. 2015). The reaction time is another factor that influences both the particle size and the reaction yield. It has been noted that the increase in the reaction time results in a higher production of nanoparticles and this can increase the likelihood of agglomeration (Veerasamy et al. 2011). On the other hand, no significant reduction of precursor solution occurs in the early reaction time (Ahmad et al. 2016), while maintaining the reaction contributes to the further growth of particles and subsequently, a larger particle size is produced. The reaction temperature has also a significant effect on the nanoparticles size. It was found that the nanoparticles synthesis rate increases at elevated temperatures (Song et al. 2009). The authors noted that 100% of precursor converted to nanoparticles at 95° C in 5 min which this value was significantly higher than synthesis at room temperature at a given time.
Copper nanoparticles show catalytic, antioxidant, antibacterial, and antifungal activities (Din et al. 2017). Leaves, barks, seeds, peels, fruits, roots, coir, and gum have been used as different parts of plants for the green synthesis of copper nanoparticles. Based on the literature, different aqueous solutions of precursors such as copper chloride, copper nitrate, copper sulphate, and copper acetate have been used for the preparation of copper nanoparticles. The reaction between plant extract and copper salt under a strong stirring condition at a controlled pH and temperature results in the formation of copper nanoparticles.
Table 3.5 shows the various sources of plant extract and reducing agents for the biosynthesis of copper nanoparticles. It has been reported that Calotropis procera L. latex is rich in protein including antioxidant enzymes (AOEs), cysteine protease with free thiol (–SH) group, and tryp-tophan (Freitas et al. 2007). Therefore, its extract can be used for the green fabrication of nanoparticles. The Calotropis procera L. latex-mediated synthesis of Cu NP was performed in the presence of copper acetate at room temperature and the particles subjected to characterization study (Harne et al. 2012). The characterization results showed monodisperse nanoparticles with an average diameter of 15 ± 1.7 nm. It was also found that the capping with latex proteins brings about a long-term stability of nanoparticles in an aqueous medium. In another investigation, the extract of Henna (Lawsonia inermis) leaves as a source of lawsone (2-hydroxy-1,4-naphthoquinone, C10H6O3), gallic acid, glucose, mannitol, fats, resin, mucilage, and alkaloids was used for copper nanoparticles synthesis (Cheirmadurai et al. 2014). Similarly, the extract obtained from dried leaves of Ginkgo biloba L. was identified as a source of polyphenolics and shown potential for the biosynthesis of copper nanoparticles (Nasrollahzadeh and Mohammad Sajadi 2015). The particles were synthesized upon the addition of Ginkgo biloba L. extract to copper chloride solution at a temperature of 80°C and pH of 9 for 30 min under vigorous shaking condition. Authors noted that the fabricated nanoparticles were stable for one month and had a narrow particle size distribution ranging from 15 to 20 nm. Copper nanoparticles were also synthesized using the aromatic dried flower buds of Myrtaceae tree (Syzygium aromaticum) (Subhankari and Nayak 2013). The copper precursor (5M copper sulphate) and plant extract were incubated for 1 h to allow the formation of nanoparticles nuclei. The characterization study was then performed using transmission electron microscopy (TEM) and scanning electron microscopy (SEM), and a particle size of 14–50 nm was noticed. Depending on the types of employed copper salts, different particle size and shape have been reported. For instance, Shanker and Rhim (Shankar and Rhim 2014) observed various particle shapes when they added different precursor salts into a solution containing ascorbic acid as a reducing agent. The presence of copper acetate resulted in the formation of rod shape nanoparticles, while the addition of copper chloride and copper sulphate led to triangular and spherical shape, respectively. In another study, it was shown that the dropwise addition of olive tree (Olea europaea) leaf extract into an aqueous solution of copper sulphate at 100°C for 24 h results in the production of copper oxide (CuO) nanoparticles (Sulaiman et al. 2018a). The synthesized CuO nanoparticles showed a peak absorbance at 298 nm in UV-vis spectroscopy analysis, and the particles had a crystalline nature with a diameter of 20 nm.
Plant Name |
Plant Part Used for Extract |
Precursor |
Reported NPs Size |
Shape |
Reference |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Ocimum basilicum L. var. purpurascens Benth |
Leaf extract |
Zinc nitrate |
50 nm |
Hexagonal | |
Anisochilus carnosus |
Leaf extract |
Zinc nitrate |
30–40 nm |
Quasi-spherical | |
Plectranthus amboinicus |
Leaf extract |
Zinc nitrate |
88 nm |
Rod shape | |
Aloe barbadensis miller |
Leaf extract |
Zinc nitrate |
25–40 nm |
Spherical | |
Aloe vera |
Leaf extract |
– |
25—65 nm |
Spherical and hexagonal | |
Aloe barbadensis Miller |
Leaf extract |
Zinc sulphate |
8–18 nm |
Spherical, oval and hexagonal | |
Vitex negundo |
Leaf extract |
Zinc nitrate |
75–80 nm |
Spherical | |
Azadirachta indica |
Leaf extract |
Zinc acetate |
9.6–25.5 nm |
Spherical | |
Vitex trifolia |
Leaf extract |
Zinc nitrate |
15–46 nm |
Spherical | |
Parthenium hysterophorus L. |
Leaf extract |
Zinc nitrate |
22–32 nm 82–86 nm |
Spherical and hexagonal | |
Artocarpus gomezianus |
Fruit extract |
Zinc nitrate |
<20 nm |
Spherical | |
Trifolium pratense |
Flower extract |
– |
100–190 nm |
– | |
Eichhornia crassipes |
Leaf extract |
Zinc nitrate |
28–36 nm |
Spherical | |
Rosa canina |
Fruit extract |
Zinc nitrate |
<50 nm |
Spherical | |
Solanum nigrum |
Leaf extract |
Zinc nitrate |
29.79 nm |
Quasi-spherical | |
Citrus paradisi |
Peel extract |
Zinc sulphate |
12–72 nm |
Spherical | |
Vitex negundo L. |
Flower extract |
Zinc nitrate |
10–130 nm |
– |
(Ambika and Sundrarajan 2015b) |
Artocarpus heterophyllus |
Leaf extract |
Zinc nitrate |
15–25 nm |
Hexagonal wurtzite | |
P. trifoliate |
Fruit extract |
Zinc nitrate |
8.48–32.51 nm |
Spherical | |
Punica granatum |
Peel extract |
Zinc nitrate |
50–100 nm |
Spherical and square | |
Agathosma betulina |
Leaf extract |
Zinc nitrate |
15.8 nm |
Quasi-spherical | |
Nephelium lappaceum L. |
Peel extract |
Zinc nitrate |
50 nm |
Needle like | |
Pongamia pinnata |
Leaf extract |
Zinc nitrate |
100 nm |
Spherical | |
Phyllanthus niruri |
Leaf extract |
Zinc nitrate |
25.61 nm |
Quasi-spherical | |
Physalis alkekengi L. |
Shoots extract |
– |
50–200 nm |
Triangular | |
Coptidis rhizoma |
Rhizome extract |
Zinc nitrate |
2.9–25.2 nm |
Spherical and rod shaped |
NP |
Plant Name |
Plant Part Used for Extract |
Precursor |
Reported NPs Size |
Shape |
Reference |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Cu |
Calotropis procera L. |
Latex extract |
Copper acetate |
15 ± 1.7 nm |
Spherical | |
Lawsonia inermis |
Leaf extract |
Copper sulphate |
43 and 83 nm |
Spherical | ||
Ginkgo biloba L. |
Leaf extract |
Copper chloride |
15–20 nm |
Spherical | ||
Syzygium aromaticum |
Clove extract |
Copper sulphate |
<50 nm |
Spherical | ||
Hibiscus rosasinensis |
Leaf extract |
Copper nitrate |
– |
Spherical | ||
Magnolia kobus |
Leaf extract |
Copper sulphate |
37–110 nm |
Spherical | ||
Caesalpinia pulcherrima |
Flower petal extract |
Copper nitrate |
18–20 nm |
Spherical | ||
Euphorbia esula L. |
Leaf extract |
Copper chloride |
20–110 nm |
Spherical | ||
Lemon |
Fruit extract |
Copper chloride |
60–100 nm |
Spherical | ||
Punica granatum |
Peel extract |
Copper sulphate |
15–20 nm |
Spherical | ||
Ocimum sanctum |
Leaf extract |
Copper sulphate |
25 nm |
Rod, cylindrical and elliptical shape | ||
Green tea |
Leaf extract |
Copper chloride |
15–25 nm |
Spherical | ||
Cochlospermum Gossypium |
Gum extract |
Copper nitrate |
19 nm |
Spherical | ||
Terminalia arjuna |
Bark extract |
Copper nitrate |
20–30 nm |
Spherical | ||
CuO |
Olea Europaea |
Leaf extract |
Copper sulphate |
20–50 nm |
Spherical | |
Drypetes sepiaria |
Leaf extract |
Copper nitrate |
– |
Spherical | ||
Eichhornia crassipes |
Leaf extract |
Copper sulphate |
28 ± 4 nm |
Spherical | ||
Ferulago angulata |
Plant extract |
Copper acetate |
44 nm |
– | ||
Pterospermum acerifolium |
Leaf extract |
Copper nitrate |
266.4 ± 447.26 nm |
Oval | ||
Abutilon indicum |
Leaf extract |
Copper nitrate |
16.78 nm |
Spherical | ||
Vitis vinifera cv. |
Fruit extract |
Copper chloride |
25–50 nm |
Spherical | ||
Saraca indica |
Leaf extract |
Copper chloride |
40–70 |
Spherical |
Aluminium oxide (Al2O3) nanoparticles are the other materials that have been used for diverse applications such as biomedical, antigen and drug delivery, biofiltration, and biosensors. These particles are biocompatible, and chemically inert and stable, and can be readily functionalized in the surface (Jalal et al. 2016, Saber 2012). The main attributes of plant-mediated synthesized Al2O3 nanoparticles are the exploitation of cost-and energy-efficient approach without using expensive equipment and toxic chemicals that are being used in chemical and physical methods.
Various sources of stabilizing agents and precursors for the green production of Al2O3 nanoparticles are given in Table 3.6. The reactions for the plant-mediated synthesis of Al2O3 nanoparticles with the help of heating are presented in the Eqs. 3.6 (Jalal et al. 2016). According to Eqs. 3.4, aluminium oxide-hydroxide (boehmite, AlOOH) can be synthesized by heating aluminium nitrate at different temperatures, and the generated AlOOH is used for the fabrication of stable Al2O3 nanoparticles. The lemon-grass extract is a source of carboxylic acids (HO2CR), and its reaction with AlOOH results in the production of carboxylate-functionalized Al2O3 nanoparticles (carboxylate-alumoxane, Eq. 3.5). As shown in Eq. 3.6, a stable form of Al2O3 (α-phase) is then produced upon the calcination of carboxylate-alumoxane at a temperature of 1100°C for 3 h.
Due to their physicochemical and biological properties, titanium dioxide (TiO2) nanoparticles have a wide range of applications. For instance, their potential oxidation strength, high photo stability, non-toxicity, and antibacterial activities make them useful in air and water purification as well as dye-sensitized solar cells (Mishra et al. 2014). In continuation of efforts for the synthesis of TiO2 nanoparticles using chemical and physical methods, a greener approach using the plant extract has been tested. Table 3.7 shows the characteristics of TiO2 nanoparticles fabricated using different plant parts. Sundrarajan and Gowri (2011) used Nyctanthes leaf extract due to its functional antioxidant, antifungal, and antimicrobial activities for the fabrication of TiO2 nanoparticles. The leaf powder was obtained by grinding of shade-dried leaves. The plant extract was then achieved by mixing the leaf powder and ethanol under reflux condition at a temperature of 50° C for 5 h. The TiO2 NPs were obtained upon the reaction of ethanolic leaf extract and titanium tetraisopropoxide at 50°C. After 4 h of vigorous stirring, the nanoparticles were formed and the separated particles were subjected to a calcination process at 500° C for 3 h. Their characterization data show that the resulted nanoparticles were crystalline with a spherical shape ranging from 100 to 150 nm. In another investigation, Calotropis gigantea flower extract and TiO(OH)2 were employed as a stabilizing and precursor agent, respectively (Marimuthu et al. 2013). The mixture of plant extract and TiO(OH)2 was kept stirring for 6 h and then subjected to ultrasonication for 30 min prior to nanoparticle separation. The results from the analyses show the fabricated nanoparticles were spherical with an average size of 160-220 nm. Rajakumar et al. (2012) proposed Eclipta prostrata for the biosynthesis of TiO2 nanoparticles. The nanoparticles were synthesized upon the reaction of E. prostrata and TiO(OH)2 under ambient temperature for 24 h. The SEM micrographs showed poorly dispersed spherical clusters with agglomeration size up to 95 nm. Few years later, the authors used the same protocol and precursor with a different plant extract “Mangifera indica L.” for the biosynthesis of TiO2 nanoparticles (Rajakumar et al 2015) Their results show that the utilization of Mangifera indica L. significantly contributed to decreasing the particle size. The characterization data show that the prepared nanoparticles had a spherical shape with an average size of 30 ± 5 nm.
Plant Name |
Plant Part Used for Extract |
Precursor |
Reported NPs Size |
Shape |
Reference |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Lemongrass |
Leaf extract |
Aluminium nitrate |
15-110 nm |
Spherical | |
Cymbopogon citratus |
Leaf extract |
Aluminium nitrate |
9-180 nm |
Spherical and spheroidal | |
Tea |
Leaf extract |
Aluminium nitrate |
50-100 nm |
Spherical | |
Coffee |
Bean extract |
Aluminium nitrate |
<100 nm |
Spherical | |
Triphala |
Seed extract |
Aluminium nitrate |
200-400 nm |
Oval |
Plant Name |
Plant Part Used for Extract |
Precursor |
Reported NPs Size |
Shape |
Reference |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Nyctanthes |
Leaf extract |
Titanium tetraisopropoxide |
100-150 nm |
Spherical | |
Calotropis gigantea |
Flower extract |
TiO(OH)2 |
160-220 nm |
Spherical | |
Eclipta prostrata |
Leaf extract |
TiO(OH)2 |
<95 nm |
Spherical | |
Mangifera indica L. |
Leaf extract |
TiO(OH)2 |
30 ± 5 |
Spherical | |
Catharanthus roseus |
Leaf extract |
– |
25-110 nm |
Irregular | |
Psidium guajava |
Leaf extract |
TiO(OH)2 |
32.58 nm |
Spherical | |
Euphorbia prostrata |
Leaf extract |
TiO(OH)2 |
83.22 ± 1.5 nm |
Spherical |
Plant-mediated synthesis is now a growing field in the synthesis of nanostructures. Since now, there is no detailed knowledge about the exact mechanism in the green synthesis reactions. In the case of some nanoparticles such as silver and gold nanoparticles, it is revealed that the reaction is a reduction reaction. This reaction is mediated by oxygen-bearing functional groups in the phytochemicals such as phenolic compounds. Iron complex nanoparticles are formed by chelating ferrous ions in the polyphenol compounds from plant extract. But, still there are many undiscovered areas in this field that needs to be explored. Questions such as the effective molecules in the green synthesis reactions, shape directing functional groups and biomolecules, interactions of phytochemicals with plant-mediated synthesized nanostructures, and effects of plant extract preparation on the synthesis reaction need to be answered. Nevertheless, green synthesis is now one of the most economic, environment-friendly, and facile techniques in the fabrication of nanostructures. Soon, it is expected to be one of the main approaches for the large-scale production of nanostructures worldwide.