| Literature DB >> 33261095 |
Kanchan Bhardwaj1, Daljeet Singh Dhanjal2, Anirudh Sharma3, Eugenie Nepovimova4, Anu Kalia5, Shabnam Thakur1, Sonali Bhardwaj2, Chirag Chopra2, Reena Singh2, Rachna Verma1, Dinesh Kumar6, Prerna Bhardwaj1, Kamil Kuča4,7.
Abstract
The use of metallic nanoparticles in engineering and biomedicine disciplines has gained considerable attention. Scientists are exploring new synthesis protocols of these substances considering their small size and lucrative antimicrobial potential. Among the most economical techniques of synthesis of metallic nanoparticles via chemical routes, which includes the use of chemicals as metal reducing agents, is considered to generate nanoparticles possessing toxicity and biological risk. This limitation of chemically synthesized nanoparticles has engendered the exploration for the ecofriendly synthesis process. Biological or green synthesis approaches have emerged as an effective solution to address the limitations of conventionally synthesized nanoparticles. Nanoparticles synthesized via biological entities obtained from plant extracts exhibit superior effect in comparison to chemical methods. Recently, conifer extracts have been found to be effective in synthesizing metallic nanoparticles through a highly regulated process. The current review highlights the importance of conifers and its extracts in synthesis of metallic nanoparticles. It also discusses the different applications of the conifer extract mediated metallic nanoparticles.Entities:
Keywords: anticancer; antimicrobial; antioxidant; catalytic; conifer extract; green synthesis; metallic nanoparticles; thrombolytic
Year: 2020 PMID: 33261095 PMCID: PMC7729856 DOI: 10.3390/ijms21239028
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Mol Sci ISSN: 1422-0067 Impact factor: 5.923
Figure 1Graphical overview of the green synthesis protocol using conifer extracts for synthesizing metallic nanoparticles.
Green synthesis of metallic nanoparticles synthesized from conifer extracts and their characterization through different analytical techniques.
| Types of Conifer | Family | Parts of Plant Used | Types of Metallic NPs | Reducing Agent | Stabilizing Agent | Reaction Time | Reaction Temp | Characterization | Shape | Size (nm) | Stability | Ref. |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| Bark | Silver | Phenolic compounds | Phenolic compounds | 3 h | 60 °C | FTIR, UV–Vis, TEM | Sphere and Polygonal | 44 | ND | [ | |
|
|
| Bark | Silver | Bark extract | Bark extract | ND | RT | UV–Vis, TEM | Sphere | 10–40 | ND | [ |
|
|
| Callus | Silver | Callus extract | Callus extract | 120 min | NS | XRD, TEM, FTIR, | Sphere | 6.4–27.2 | More than 2 weeks | [ |
|
| Cone/Flower | Copper | Phenolic groups | Phenolic groups | NS | NS | FTIR, SEM | ND | 20–35 | ND | [ | |
|
| Berry/Cone | Gold | Carbonyl, Carboxyl and Hydroxyl groups | Polyphenols | 24 h | RT | AFM, ATR-FTIR, EDX, UV–Vis, TEM, | Sphere and Triangle | 10–50 | ND | [ | |
|
|
| Cone | Silver | Hydroxyl and Carbonyl groups | Phytochemicals | 15 min | RT | UV–Vis, TEM, FTIR, XRD | Oval and Triangular | 40–70 | ND | [ |
|
| Cone | Silver | Phenolic hydroxyl groups | Cone flower | 60 min | 60 °C | UV–Vis, TEM, FTIR | Sphere | 8–23 | ND | [ | |
|
|
| Gum | Silver | Gum extract | Gum extract | NS | NS | AFM, EDX, FTIR, SEM, UV–Vis | ND | <25 | ND | [ |
|
|
| Gum | Silver | Gum extract | Gum extract | NS | RT | UV–Vis, FTIR, SEM, EDX, AFM | Sphere | <30 | ND | [ |
|
|
| Leaf/Needle | Gold | Needle extract | Needle extract | 24 h | 25 °C | UV–Vis, HRTEM, EDX, AFM | Sphere, Semi-sphere, Hexagonal and Triangle | <20 | Several months | [ |
|
|
| Leaf/Needle | Gold | Phytochemicals | Phytochemicals | 10 min | RT | EDX, FTIR, XRD, TEM, UV–Vis, | Sphere | 5–94 | ND | [ |
|
|
| Leaf/Needle | Iron Oxide | Leaf extract | Leaf extract | 30 min | RT | TEM, FTIR, XRD, EDX | Sphere | 8–34 | ND | [ |
|
|
| Leaf/Needle | Silver | Carboxyl and Hydroxyl and Amine groups | Phytochemicals | 60 min | 80 °C | UV–Vis, FTIR, SEM | Sphere | 67–200 | 4 months | [ |
|
|
| Leaf/Needle | Silver | Carbonyl and Hydroxyl groups | Phytochemicals | 12 h | RT | UV–Vis, TEM, XRD, FTIR | Sphere, Hexahedral, Oval and Triangle | 10–80 | ND | [ |
|
| Leaf/Needle | Silver | Leaf extract | Leaf extract | 24 h | NS | UV–Vis, SEM, XRD, TEM | Sphere | NS | ND | [ | |
|
|
| Leaves | Silver | Phenolic acids, chlorogenic acid, flavonoids, caffeoylquinic acids | Phytochemicals | 24 h | RT | UV–Vis SEM, FTIR | Spherical, cubical | 30–90 | ND | [ |
|
|
| Leaf/Needle | Silver | Proteins | Phytochemicals | 60 min | 100 °C | EDX, XRD, HRTEM, UV–Vis | NS | 18–25 | ND | [ |
|
|
| Leaf/Needle | Silver | Proteins and Terpenoids | Phytochemicals | NS | 10 and 30 °C | UV–Vis, TEM, AFM | Triangular and Hexagonal | 75.1 | Six months | [ |
|
| Leaf/Needle | Silver | Carbonyl, Carboxyl, Aliphatic and Aromatic amine groups | Carbonyl, Carboxyl, Aliphatic and Aromatic amine groups | 35–40 min | 60 °C | FTIR, UV–Vis, SEM, XRD, TEM | Sphere | <30 | ND | [ | |
|
|
| Leaf/Needle | Silver | Hydroxyl and Carbonyl groups | Phytochemicals | 3–4 h | RT | XRD, FTIR | ND | 41.48 | ND | [ |
|
|
| Leaf/Needle | Silver | Leaf extract | Leaf extract | 3–4 h | RT | UV–Vis, FTIR | ND | ND | ND | [ |
|
|
| Leaf/Needle | Silver | Leaf extract | Leaf extract | NS | NS | UV–Vis, XRD, HRTEM | ND | 7–14 | ND | [ |
|
|
| Leaf/Needle | Silver | Leaf extract | Leaf extract | NS | RT | UV–Vis, XRD, TEM | ND | 10–15 | ND | [ |
|
|
| Leaf/Needle | Silver | Proteins | Proteins | 24 hrs | 20 °C | FTIR, XRD, TEM, UV–Vis, | Sphere | 10–125 | ND | [ |
|
|
| Leaf/Needle | Zinc Oxide | Proteins | Proteins | NS | NS | UV–Vis, SEM, TEM, FTIR | Hexagonal | 20–27.64 | ND | [ |
|
|
| Pollen | Gold | Pollen extract | Pollen extract | 60 min | RT | UV–Vis | ND | ND | 3 months | [ |
|
|
| Stem | Silver | Hydroxyl groups | Phytochemicals | 30 min | 55 °C | EDX, FTIR, SEM, UV–Vis, XRD | Sphere | 10–30 | ND | [ |
|
|
| NS | Gold | Polyphenols | Polyphenols | 24 h | 29 °C | AFM, DLS, EDX, FTIR, UV–Vis, XRD, | Sphere | 20–200 | ND | [ |
|
|
| NS | Silver | Carbonyl groups | Flavonoids, Terpenoids and Thiamines | 10 min | 27 °C | DLS, TEM, XRD, UV–Vis, | Sphere | 122.8 | ND | [ |
NS—not specified; AFM—Atomic force microscopy; ATR-FTIR—Attenuated total reflection-Fourier-transform infrared spectroscopy; DLS—Dynamic light scattering; EDX—Energy-dispersive X-ray spectroscopy; FESEM—Field emission electron microscope; HRTEM—High-resolution transmission electron microscopy; FT-IR—Fourier-transform infrared spectroscopy; RT—room temperature; SEM—Scanning electron microscopy; TEM—Transmission electron microscopy; UV–Vis—Ultraviolet-visible spectroscopy; XRD—X-ray powder diffraction. ND—Not determined.
Agricultural and biomedical applications of conifer plant extract derived metal (Ag and Au) nanoparticles.
| Types of Conifer | Family | Applications | Ref. |
|---|---|---|---|
|
| |||
|
|
| Antibacterial activity against | [ |
|
|
| Antimicrobial, cellular proliferation/cytotoxicity | [ |
|
|
| Antibacterial activity against | [ |
|
|
| Antibacterial activity against | [ |
|
|
| Antibacterial activity against | [ |
|
|
| Anti-cancerous activity against human breast (MCF-7) cell line | [ |
|
|
| Antibacterial activity against | [ |
|
|
| Plant growth promoter and soil conditioner | [ |
|
|
| Antibacterial activity against | [ |
|
|
| Antibacterial activity against | [ |
|
|
| Antibacterial activity against | [ |
|
| |||
|
|
| Anti-cancerous activity against bladder cancer (T24) cell line | [ |
|
|
| Antifungal activity against | [ |
|
|
| Anti-cancerous activity against MCF-7, HeLa and Caov-4 cell lines | [ |
NS—not specified.
Figure 2Graphical illustration of conifer sources used for the production of metallic nanoparticles with potential biological activities.
Figure 3Graphical illustration of the antimicrobial mechanism of nanoparticles.
Figure 4Graphical illustration of the anticancer mechanism of nanoparticles.
Figure 5Graphical illustration of the antioxidant mechanism of nanoparticles.