4.6 Article

Various Physiological Response to Graphene Oxide and Amine-Functionalized Graphene Oxide in Wheat (Triticum aestivum)

Journal

MOLECULES
Volume 23, Issue 5, Pages -

Publisher

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/molecules23051104

Keywords

graphene oxide; amined-functioned graphene oxide; Triticum aestivum; phytotoxicity

Funding

  1. Research Fund for the Doctoral Program of Southwest University [SWU117012]
  2. National Natural Science Foundation of China [31572041]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

An increasing number of investigations have been performed on the phytotoxicity of carbon-based nanomaterials duo to their extensive use in various fields. In the present study, we investigated the phytotoxicity of unfunctionalized graphene oxide (GO) and amine-functionalized graphene oxide (G-NH2) on wheat (Triticum aestivum) in the concentration range from 125 to 2000 g/mL after 9 days of hydroponic culture. Our results found that the incubation with both nanomaterials did not affect the final seed germination rate, despite some influence in the initial stage. Transmission electron microscopy (TEM) observations indicated that exposure to GO at a high concentration (above 1000 g/mL) resulted in a severe loss of morphology of seedlings, and a decrease in root length, shoot length and relative biomass, along with obvious damage to plant tissue structures (root, stem and leaf) when compared with the control. GO induced increased damage to root cells, which were determined by electrolyte leakage. Conversely, the plant growth was enhanced under G-NH2 exposure, and the root and stem lengths were increased by 19.27% and 19.61% at 2000 g/mL, respectively. The plant tissue structures were not affected, and neither GO nor G-NH2 were observed to accumulate in the wheat plant root cells. The present investigations provide important information for evaluation of the environmental safety of GO and better understanding plant-nanoparticle interactions.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available