Nano-enabled plant fortification: green-synthesized SiO2 and emamectin benzoate nanoparticles synergistically boost maize defense and agronomic performance against Spodoptera frugiperda infestation

1. Grote, U., Fasse, A., Nguyen, T. T. & Erenstein, O. Food security and the dynamics of wheat and maize value chains in Africa and Asia. Front. Sustain. Food Syst. 4, 617009. https://doi.org/10.3389/fsufs.2020.617009 (2021).

   Google Scholar 

2. Gesteiro, N. et al. Breeding dual-purpose maize: Grain production and biofuel conversion of the stover. Agronomy 13, 1352. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy13051352 (2023).

   Google Scholar 

3. Mut, Z., Kardeş, Y. M. & Köse, Ö. D. E. Determining the grain yield and nutritional composition of maize cultivars in different growing groups. Turk. J. Field Crops 27, 158–166. https://doi.org/10.33408/turkjf.1061730 (2022).

   Google Scholar 

4. FAOSTAT. Crops and livestock products. Statistics Division. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations: Rome, Italy. http://www.fao.org/faostat/en/#data (2025).

5. MALR. Bulletin of agricultural statistics, Arab Republic of Egypt. Ministry of Agriculture and Land Reclamation, the Egyptian Economic Affairs Sector: Dokki, Egypt (2022).

6. Smith, J. E. & Abbott, J. The Natural History of the Rarer Lepidopterous Insects of Georgia: Including Their Systematic Characters, the Particulars of Their Several Metamorphoses, and the Plants on Which they Feed 191–192 (Missouri Botanical Garden Press, 1797).

   Google Scholar 

7. Mendesil, E. et al. The invasive fall armyworm, Spodoptera frugiperda, in Africa and Asia: Responding to the food security challenge, with priorities for integrated pest management research. J. Plant Dis. Protect. 130, 1175–1206. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41348-023-00762-2 (2023).

   Google Scholar 

8. Ul Haq, I. et al. Silicon-based induced resistance in maize against fall armyworm [Spodoptera frugiperda (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae)]. PLoS ONE 16, e0259749. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0259749 (2021).

   Google Scholar 

9. Montezano, D. G. et al. Host plants of Spodoptera frugiperda (Lepidoptera:Noctuidae) in the Americas. Afr. Entomol. 26, 286–300. https://doi.org/10.4001/003.026.0286 (2018).

   Google Scholar 

10. Herlinda, S. et al. First report of occurrence of corn and rice strains of fall armyworm, Spodoptera frugiperda in South Sumatra, Indonesia and its damage in maize. J. Saudi Soc. Agric. Sci. 21, 412–419. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jssas.2021.12.002 (2022).

    Google Scholar 

11. Kumar, R. M. et al. Sustainable management of invasive fall armyworm, Spodoptera frugiperda. Agronomy 12, 2017. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy12092017 (2022).

    Google Scholar 

12. Boregas, K. G. B., Mendes, S. M., Waquil, J. M. & Fernandes, G. W. Fitness stage of Spodoptera frugiperda (J E Smith) (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) on alternative hosts. Bragantia 72, 61–70. https://doi.org/10.1590/S0006-87052013000100009 (2013).

    Google Scholar 

13. Van den Berg, J. & du Plessis, H. Chemical control and insecticide resistance in Spodoptera frugiperda (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae). J. Econ. Entomol. 115, 1761–1771. https://doi.org/10.1093/jee/toac118 (2022).

    Google Scholar 

14. Chen, Y. et al. Performance of Spodoptera frugiperda (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) fed on six host plants: Potential risks to mid-high latitude crops in China. J. Agric. Sci. 12, 16–27. https://doi.org/10.5539/jas.v12n10p16 (2020).

    Google Scholar 

15. Paudel, T. B. et al. Potential distribution of fall armyworm in Africa and beyond, considering climate change and irrigation patterns. Sci. Rep. 12, 539. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-04242-7 (2022).

    Google Scholar 

16. FAO. Brochure emphasizes success in sustainable pest management through FAO’s Global Action for Fall Armyworm Control. (2024). https://www.fao.org/fall-armyworm/success-stories/detail/en/c/1711354/.

17. Midega, C. et al. Fall armyworm: Measuring damage and loss caused by a novel invasive pest as a guide to sustainable management. FAO Stat. Work. Pap. Ser. 23, 23–38 (2023).

    Google Scholar 

18. Cokola, M. C. et al. Managing fall armyworm, Spodoptera frugiperda (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae): Experience from smallholder farmers in central and western Africa. Food Energy Secur. 12, e491. https://doi.org/10.1002/fes3.491 (2023).

    Google Scholar 

19. Abrahams, P. et al. Fall armyworm: Impacts and implications for Africa. Outlooks Pest Manag. 28, 196–201. https://doi.org/10.1564/v28_dec_04 (2017).

    Google Scholar 

20. Montezano, D. G. et al. Biotic potential and reproductive parameters of Spodoptera frugiperda (J. E. Smith, 1797) (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae). J. Agric. Sci. 11, 240–252. https://doi.org/10.5539/jas.v11n13p240 (2019).

    Google Scholar 

21. Paredes-Sánchez, F. A. et al. Advances in control strategies against Spodoptera frugiperda. A review. Molecules 26, 5587. https://doi.org/10.3390/molecules26185587 (2021).

    Google Scholar 

22. Boaventura, D. et al. Detection of a ryanodine receptor target-site mutation in diamide insecticide-resistant fall armyworm, Spodoptera frugiperda. Pest Manag. Sci. 76, 47–54. https://doi.org/10.1002/ps.5505 (2020).

    Google Scholar 

23. Nguyen, D. T., Chen, Y. & Herron, G. A. Preliminary characterisation of known pesticide resistance alleles in Spodoptera frugiperda (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) in its invasive Australian range. Austral Entomol. 60, 782–790. https://doi.org/10.1111/aen.12570 (2021).

    Google Scholar 

24. Zhang, J. et al. A binary mixture of emamectin benzoate and chlorantraniliprole supplemented with an adjuvant effectively controls Spodoptera frugiperda. Insects 13, 1157. https://doi.org/10.3390/insects13121157 (2022).

    Google Scholar 

25. Wang, H.-H. et al. Genetic architecture and insecticide resistance in Chinese populations of Spodoptera frugiperda. J. Pest Sci. 96, 1595–1610. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10340-022-01569-2 (2023).

    Google Scholar 

26. Saeed, R., Abbas, N. & Mehmood, Z. Emamectin benzoate resistance risk assessment in Dysdercus koenigii: Cross-resistance and inheritance patterns. Crop Protect. 130, 105069. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cropro.2019.105069 (2020).

    Google Scholar 

27. Wang, X.-Z. et al. Knockdown of the glutamate-gated chloride channel gene decreases emamectin benzoate susceptibility in the fall armyworm, Spodoptera frugiperda. Pestic. Biochem. Physiol. 196, 105636. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pestbp.2023.105636 (2023).

    Google Scholar 

28. Anandhi, S., Saminathan, V. R., Yasotha, P., Saravanan, P. T. & Rajanbabu, V. Nano-pesticides in pest management. J. Entomol. Zool. Stud. 8, 685–690 (2020).

    Google Scholar 

29. Konappa, N. et al. Nanofertilizers and nanopesticides: Recent trends, future prospects in agriculture. In Advances in Nano-fertilizers and Nano-pesticides in Agriculture (eds Jogaiah, S. et al.) 281–330 (Elsevier, 2021).

    Google Scholar 

30. Pathak, V. M. et al. Current status of pesticide effects on environment, human health and it’s eco-friendly management as bioremediation: A comprehensive review. Front. Microbiol. 13, 962619. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2022.962619 (2022).

    Google Scholar 

31. Gao, F. et al. Nano-EMB-SP improves the solubility, foliar affinity, photostability and bioactivity of emamectin benzoate. Pest Manag. Sci. 78, 3717–3724. https://doi.org/10.1002/ps.6999 (2022).

    Google Scholar 

32. Abd-Elnaeim, A. D. & Badawy, M. E. I. Combating Spodoptera frugiperda (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) with moringa-synthesized silica nanoparticles and its combination with some insecticides. Neotrop. Entomol. 53, 1343–1353. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13744-024-01201-9 (2024).

    Google Scholar 

33. Liu, Z. K. et al. Sublethal effects of emamectin benzoate on fall armyworm, Spodoptera frugiperda (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae). Agriculture 12, 959. https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture12070959 (2022).

    Google Scholar 

34. Chen, Y. X. et al. Sublethal effects of emamectin benzoate on development, reproduction, and vitellogenin and vitellogenin receptor gene expression in Thrips hawaiiensis (Thysanoptera: Thripidae). J. Insect Sci. 23, 12. https://doi.org/10.1093/jisesa/iead035 (2023).

    Google Scholar 

35. Chen, X., Qiu, L., Liu, Q. & He, Y. Preparation of an environmentally friendly nano-insecticide through encapsulation in polymeric liposomes and its insecticidal activities against the fall armyworm. Spodoptera frugiperda. Insects 13, 625. https://doi.org/10.3390/insects13070625 (2022).

    Google Scholar 

36. Wei, Y. et al. Nano-enabled insecticides for efficient pest management: Definition, classification, synergistic mechanism, and safety assessment. Nanomaterials 15, 1050. https://doi.org/10.3390/nano15131050 (2025).

    Google Scholar 

37. Fiaboe, K. R. M., Khamis, F. M., Cheseto, X., Yusuf, A. A. & Torto, B. Nanosilica supplementation in tomato increases oviposition on stems and caterpillar mortality in the tomato pinworm. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 122, e2427314122. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2427314122 (2025).

    Google Scholar 

38. Acevedo, F. E., Peiffer, M., Ray, S., Tan, C. W. & Felton, G. W. Silicon-mediated enhancement of herbivore resistance in agricultural crops. Front. Plant Sci. 12, 631824. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2021.631824 (2021).

    Google Scholar 

39. Guo, M. et al. Preparation and characterization of enzyme-responsive emamectin benzoate microcapsules based on a copolymer matrix of silica–epichlorohydrin–carboxymethylcellulose. RSC Adv. 5, 93170–93179. https://doi.org/10.1039/C5RA17711A (2015).

    Google Scholar 

40. Robledo-Olivo, A., Cabrera-De la Fuente, M. & Benavides-Mendoza, A. Application of nanosilicon and nanochitosan to diminish the use of pesticides and synthetic fertilizers in crop production. In Handbook of Nanomaterials and Nanocomposites for Energy and Environmental Applications 2093–2119 (Springer, 2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-41031-1_78.

41. Shoaib, A. et al. Preparation and characterization of emamectin benzoate nanoformulations based on colloidal delivery systems and use in controlling Plutella xylostella (L.) (Lepidoptera: Plutellidae). RSC Adv. 8, 15687–15697. https://doi.org/10.1039/C8RA01297K (2018).

    Google Scholar 

42. Nagaratna, W. et al. Silicon accumulation in leaves reduces the herbivory by invasive fall armyworm Spodoptera frugiperda and enhances the yield of maize. Int. J. Plant Biol. 14, 701–713. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijpb14030053 (2023).

    Google Scholar 

43. Long, Y. et al. Distribution of emamectin benzoate granules in maize plants by broadcasting into maize leaf whorls. ACS Omega 8, 4209–4219. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsomega.2c07094 (2023).

    Google Scholar 

44. Zhang, Z. et al. Fabrication of an environmentally friendly 2D MXene-avermectin hybrid nanopesticide for use against Spodoptera frugiperda. ChemistrySelect 7, e202200995. https://doi.org/10.1002/slct.202200995 (2022).

    Google Scholar 

45. Ul Haq, I. et al. Effectiveness of silicon on immature stages of the fall armyworm [Spodoptera frugiperda (JE Smith)]. J. King Saud Univ. Sci. 34, 102152. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jksus.2022.102152 (2022).

    Google Scholar 

46. Abdelbaky, A. S. & Diab, Y. M. Effect of various extraction methods and solvent types on yield phenolic and flavonoid content and antioxidant activity of Spathodea nilotica leaves. Egypt. J. Chem. 64, 7483–7489. https://doi.org/10.21608/ejchem.2021.75848.3712 (2021).

    Google Scholar 

47. Ismail, S. H. et al. Synthesis and characterization of antibacterial carbopol/ZnO hybrid nanoparticles gel. Crystals 11, 1092. https://doi.org/10.3390/cryst11091092 (2021).

    Google Scholar 

48. Al-Gethami, W., Al-Qasmi, N., Ismail, S. H. & Sadek, A. H. QCM-based MgFe₂O₄@CaAlg nanocomposite as a fast response nanosensor for real-time detection of methylene blue dye. Nanomaterials 13, 97. https://doi.org/10.3390/nano13010097 (2023).

    Google Scholar 

49. Hassan, H. M. et al. ZnO, TiO₂ and Fe₃O₄/carbopol hybrid nanogels for the cleaner process of paper manuscripts from dust stains and soil remains. Herit. Sci. 11, 213. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40494-023-01047-y (2023).

    Google Scholar 

50. Sitohy, M. et al. Silver-protein nanocomposites as antimicrobial agents. Nanomaterials 11, 3006. https://doi.org/10.3390/nano11113006 (2021).

    Google Scholar 

51. Alhadhrami, A. et al. Behavior of silica nanoparticles synthesized from rice husk ash by the sol–gel method as a photocatalytic and antibacterial agent. Materials 15, 8211. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma15228211 (2022).

    Google Scholar 

52. Abdel Rahman, A. N., Elkhadrawy, B., Mahboub, H. H. & Ismail, S. H. Alleviating effect of a magnetite (Fe₃O₄) nanogel against waterborne-lead-induced physiological disturbances, histopathological changes, and lead bioaccumulation in African catfish (Clarias gariepinus). Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 30, 84079–84094. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-023-28045-w (2023).

    Google Scholar 

53. Moustafa, M. A. M. et al. In vitro and silico exploration of the insecticidal properties of Lavandula multifida L. essential oil and its binary combinations with cyantraniliprole and emamectin benzoate on Spodoptera frugiperda (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae). Crop Protect. 187, 106969. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cropro.2024.106969 (2025).

    Google Scholar 

54. Chen, C., Tang, Y., Zhao, Y., Zhang, X. & Zhang, K. Life table study of sublethal concentrations of emamectin benzoate against Spodoptera frugiperda (Lepidoptera, Noctuidae). J. Insect Sci. 25, 17. https://doi.org/10.1093/jisesa/ieaf014 (2025).

    Google Scholar 

55. Abbott, W. S. A method of computing the effectiveness of an insecticide. J. Econ. Entomol. 18, 265–267. https://doi.org/10.1093/jee/18.2.265 (1925).

    Google Scholar 

56. Finney, D. J. Probit Analysis (Cambridge University Press, 1971).

    Google Scholar 

57. Mansour, N. A., Eldefrawi, M. E., Toppozoda, A. & Zeid, M. Toxicological studies on the Egyptian cotton leaf worm, Prodenia litura. VI. Potentiation and antagonism of organophosphorus and carbamate insecticides. J. Econ. Entomol. 59, 307–311. https://doi.org/10.1093/jee/59.2.307 (1966).

    Google Scholar 

58. Zhang, Q. et al. Molecular characterization analysis and adaptive responses of Spodoptera frugiperda (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) to nutritional and enzymatic variabilities in various maize cultivars. Plants 13, 597. https://doi.org/10.3390/plants13050597 (2024).

    Google Scholar 

59. Abd El-Aty, H. S., Farag, A. A., El-Zahi, E. S. & Ahmed, A. A. Lethal and sublethal effects of different insecticides against the fall armyworm, Spodoptera frugiperda (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae). Egypt. J. Plant Protect. Res. Inst. 8, 131–139. https://doi.org/10.4314/ejppri.v8i2.4 (2025).

    Google Scholar 

60. Lowry, O. H., Rosebrough, N. J., Farr, A. L. & Randall, R. J. Protein measurement with the folin phenol reagent. J. Biol. Chem. 193, 265–275. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0021-9258(19)52451-6 (1951).

    Google Scholar 

61. Gomori, G. Human esterases. J. Lab. Clin. Med. 42, 445–453 (1953).

    Google Scholar 

62. Scharf, M. E., Neal, J. J. & Bennett, G. W. Changes of insecticide resistance levels and detoxication enzymes following insecticide selection in the German Cockroach, Blattella germanica (L.). Pestic. Biochem. Physiol. 59, 67–79. https://doi.org/10.1006/pest.1997.2307 (1997).

    Google Scholar 

63. Klute, A. & Dirksen, C. Hydraulic conductivity and diffusivity: Laboratory methods. Methods Soil Anal. Part 1 Phys. Mineral. Methods 5, 687–734. https://doi.org/10.2136/sssabookser5.1 (1986).

    Google Scholar 

64. Page, A. L., Miller, R. H. & Keeney, D. R. Methods of Soil Analysis, Part 2: Chemical and Microbiological Properties (American Society of Agronomy, 1982).

    Google Scholar 

65. Paye, W. et al. Determination of critical soil silicon levels for rice production in Louisiana using different extraction procedures. Commun. Soil Sci. Plant Anal. 49, 2091–2102. https://doi.org/10.1080/00103624.2018.1495731 (2018).

    Google Scholar 

66. Agricultural Pesticides Committee. Certified Recommendations for Agricultural Pesticides 2024. Ministry of Agriculture and Land Reclamation, Arab Republic of Egypt. https://agricultureegypt.com/uploads/Committees/PDF/Recomm2024.pdf (2024).

67. Meier, U. Growth Stages of Mono- and Dicotyledonous Plants. BBCH Monograph (Julius Kühn-Institut (JKI), 2018).

    Google Scholar 

68. Toepfer, S. et al. Streamlining leaf damage rating scales for the fall armyworm on maize. J. Pest Sci. 94, 1075–1089. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10340-020-01319-y (2021).

    Google Scholar 

69. Maxwell, K. & Johnson, G. N. Chlorophyll fluorescence—A practical guide. J. Exp. Bot. 51, 659–668. https://doi.org/10.1093/jxb/51.345.659 (2000).

    Google Scholar 

70. Clark, A. J., Landolt, W., Bucher, J. B. & Strasser, R. J. Beech (Fagus sylvatica) response to ozone exposure assessed with a chlorophyll a fluorescence performance index. Environ. Pollut. 109, 501–507. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0269-7491(00)00053-1 (2000).

    Google Scholar 

71. Montgomery, E. C. Correlation studies in corn. Neb. Agric. Exp. Stn. Annu. Rep. 24, 108–159 (1911).

    Google Scholar 

72. Agami, R. A., Medani, R. A., Abd El-Mola, I. A. & Taha, R. S. Exogenous application with plant growth promoting rhizobacteria (PGPR) or proline induces stress tolerance in basil plants (Ocimum basilicum L.) exposed to water stress. Int. J. Environ. Agric. Res. 2, 78–92 (2016).

    Google Scholar 

73. Mohamed, I. A. A. et al. Stomatal and photosynthetic traits are associated with investigating sodium chloride tolerance of Brassica napus L. cultivars. Plants 9, 62. https://doi.org/10.3390/plants9010062 (2020).

    Google Scholar 

74. Sass, J. A. Botanical Microtechnique (The Iowa State University Press, 1961).

    Google Scholar 

75. Novozamsky, I., van Eck, R. & Houba, V. J. G. A rapid determination of silicon in plant material. Commun. Soil Sci. Plant Anal. 15, 205–211. https://doi.org/10.1080/00103628409367470 (1984).

    Google Scholar 

76. Taber, H. G., Shogren, D. & Lu, G. Extraction of silicon from plant tissue with dilute HCl and HF and measurement by modified inductive coupled argon plasma procedures. Commun. Soil Sci. Plant Anal. 33, 1661–1670. https://doi.org/10.1081/CSS-120004306 (2002).

    Google Scholar 

77. Gomez, K. A. & Gomez, A. A. Statistical Procedures for Agricultural Research (Wiley, 1984).

    Google Scholar 

78. Kulye, M. et al. Baseline susceptibility of Spodoptera frugiperda populations collected in India towards different chemical classes of insecticides. Insects 12, 758. https://doi.org/10.3390/insects12080758 (2021).

    Google Scholar 

79. Abdelbaky, A. S., Abd El-Mageed, T. A., Babalghith, A. O., Selim, S. & Mohamed, A. M. Green synthesis and characterization of ZnO nanoparticles using Pelargonium odoratissimum (L.) aqueous leaf extract and their antioxidant, antibacterial and anti-inflammatory activities. Antioxidants 11, 1444. https://doi.org/10.3390/antiox11081444 (2022).

    Google Scholar 

80. Villagrán, Z. et al. Plant-based extracts as reducing, capping, and stabilizing agents for the green synthesis of inorganic nanoparticles. Resources 13, 70. https://doi.org/10.3390/resources13060070 (2024).

    Google Scholar 

81. Amin, H. S. H., Ali, M. S. S., El-Sheikh, T. A. A. E. H. & El-Gohary, E. G. E. S. A. Hematological and histopathological impacts of nano-emamectin benzoate against the larvae of the cotton leafworm, Spodoptera littoralis (Boisduval) (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) under laboratory conditions. Beni-Suef Univ. J. Basic Appl. Sci. 11, 133. https://doi.org/10.1186/s43088-022-00315-9 (2022).

    Google Scholar 

82. Yu, Y. et al. Dual-stimuli-responsive silica-based emamectin benzoate nanodelivery system for effective control of Spodoptera frugiperda and safety assessment toward Microplitis manilae. Chem. Eng. J. 497, 154998. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cej.2024.154998 (2024).

    Google Scholar 

83. Manna, S. et al. Current and future prospects of “all-organic” nanoinsecticides for agricultural insect pest management. Front. Nanotechnol. 4, 1082128. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnano.2022.1082128 (2023).

    Google Scholar 

84. Zong, S. et al. Mesoporous silica nanoparticles enhance the toxicity of chlorantraniliprole to Spodoptera frugiperda by possibly inhibiting energy metabolism and chitin protein synthesis. Insect Sci. https://doi.org/10.1111/1744-7917.70106 (2025).

    Google Scholar 

85. Barik, T. K., Kamaraju, R. & Gowswami, A. Silica nanoparticle: A potential new insecticide for mosquito vector control. Parasitol. Res. 111, 1075–1083. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00436-012-2895-5 (2012).

    Google Scholar 

86. Hussein, H. S., Tawfeek, M. E. & Eldesouky, S. E. Toxicity and biochemical effects of spirotetramat and its binary mixtures with nanosilica against Aphis gossypii glover, Bemisia tabaci gennadius and the earthworm, Eisenia fetida. Alex. Sci. Exch. J. 43, 107–117. https://doi.org/10.21608/asejaiqjsae.2022.223962 (2022).

    Google Scholar 

87. Jayapradha, J. et al. Potential nano strategies in insect pest management: synthesis, applications and plant interactions. Plant Sci. Today 12, 1–14. https://doi.org/10.14719/pst.7294 (2025).

    Google Scholar 

88. Saw, G., Nagdev, P., Jeer, M. & Murali-Baskaran, R. K. Silica nanoparticles mediated insect pest management. Pestic. Biochem. Physiol. 194, 105524. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pestbp.2023.105524 (2023).

    Google Scholar 

89. Thabet, A. F. et al. Silica nanoparticles as pesticide against insects of different feeding types and their non-target attraction of predators. Sci. Rep. 11, 14484. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-93518-9 (2021).

    Google Scholar 

90. Ding, X. et al. Size-dependent effect on foliar utilization and biocontrol efficacy of emamectin benzoate delivery systems. ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 16, 22558–22570. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsami.4c02936 (2024).

    Google Scholar 

91. Soliman, B. S. M. Efficacy and biochemical analysis of sub-lethal concentrations of some insecticides against Spodoptera frugiperda (JE Smith)(Lepidoptera: Noctuidae). Alex. Sci. Exch. J. 46, 81–90. https://doi.org/10.21608/asejaiqjsae.2025.412092 (2025).

    Google Scholar 

92. Santo-Orihuela, P. L., Foglia, M. L., Targovnik, A. M., Miranda, M. V. & Desimone, M. F. Nanotoxicological effects of SiO₂ nanoparticles on Spodoptera frugiperda Sf9 cells. Curr. Pharm. Biotechnol. 17, 465–470. https://doi.org/10.2174/138920101705160222122606 (2016).

    Google Scholar 

93. Ul Haq, I. et al. Transcriptomic and biochemical insights into fall armyworm (Spodoptera frugiperda) responses on silicon-treated maize. PeerJ 12, e16859. https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj.16859 (2024).

    Google Scholar 

94. Feng, J. et al. Fabrication of abamectin-loaded mesoporous silica nanoparticles by emulsion-solvent evaporation to improve photolysis stability and extend insecticidal activity. Nanotechnology 31, 345705. https://doi.org/10.1088/1361-6528/ab91f0 (2020).

    Google Scholar 

95. Ul Haq, I. et al. Mesoporous silica nanoparticles impair physiology and reproductive fitness of Tuta absoluta through plant-mediated oxidative stress and enzymatic disruption. Insects 16, 877. https://doi.org/10.3390/insects16090877 (2025).

    Google Scholar 

96. Malhat, F., Fayz, A. E. S., Loutfy, N. M. & Ahmed, M. T. Residues and dissipation of the pesticide emamectin benzoate under Egyptian field condition: A case study. Toxicol. Environ. Chem. 95, 1099–1107. https://doi.org/10.1080/02772248.2013.865908 (2013).

    Google Scholar 

97. Zhou, L. et al. Dissipation, transfer and safety evaluation of emamectin benzoate in tea. Food Chem. 202, 199–204. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodchem.2015.11.069 (2016).

    Google Scholar 

98. Massey, F. P. & Hartley, S. E. Physical defences wear you down: Progressive and irreversible impacts of silica on insect herbivores. J. Anim. Ecol. 78, 281–291. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2656.2008.01478.x (2009).

    Google Scholar 

99. Alyousuf, A., Hamid, D., Desher, M. A., Nikpay, A. & Laane, H. M. Effect of silicic acid formulation (Silicon 0.8%) on two major insect pests of tomato under greenhouse conditions. Silicon 14, 3019–3025. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12633-021-01046-6 (2022).

    Google Scholar 

100. Esmail, L. M., Abdel-Aziz, H. M., Abd El-Aziz, M. H. & Soliman, M. I. Impacts of silicon and silicon nanoparticles on leaf cell ultrastructure of pea plant under salinity stress. Mansoura J. Biol. 63, 27–39. https://doi.org/10.21608/mjb.2023.213123.1026 (2023).

     Google Scholar 

101. Reynolds, O. L., Padula, M. P., Zeng, R. S. & Gurr, G. M. Silicon: Potential to promote direct and indirect effects on plant defense against arthropod pests in agriculture. Front. Plant Sci. 7, 744. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2016.00744 (2016).

     Google Scholar 

102. Bhavanam, S. & Stout, M. J. Assessment of silicon-and mycorrhizae-mediated constitutive and induced systemic resistance in rice, Oryza sativa L., against the fall armyworm, Spodoptera frugiperda. Smith. Plants 10, 2126. https://doi.org/10.3390/plants10102126 (2021).

     Google Scholar 

103. Shaaban, A. et al. Foliar fertilization with potassium silicate enhances water productivity and drought resilience in sugar beet. Field Crops Res. 326, 109840. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fcr.2025.109840 (2025)

     Google Scholar 

104. Tobiasz-Salach, R., Mazurek, M. & Jacek, B. Physiological, biochemical, and epigenetic reaction of maize (Zea mays L.) to cultivation in conditions of varying soil salinity and foliar application of silicon. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 24, 1141. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms24021141 (2023).

     Google Scholar 

105. Lata-Tenesaca, L. F. et al. Physiological and biochemical aspects of silicon-mediated resistance in maize against maydis leaf blight. Plants 13, 531. https://doi.org/10.3390/plants13040531 (2024).

     Google Scholar 

106. Wang, L., Ning, C., Pan, T. & Cai, K. Role of silica nanoparticles in abiotic and biotic stress tolerance in plants: A review. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 23, 10156. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms231710156 (2022).

     Google Scholar 

107. Li, F., Hou, Y., Chen, L. & Qiu, Y. Advances in silica nanoparticles for agricultural applications and biosynthesis. Adv. Biotechnol. 3, 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1002/adbi.202400072 (2025).

     Google Scholar 

108. Jin, W., Li, L., He, W. & Wei, Z. Application of silica nanoparticles improved the growth, yield, and grain quality of two salt-tolerant rice varieties under saline irrigation. Plants 13, 2452. https://doi.org/10.3390/plants13172452 (2024).

     Google Scholar 

109. Hartley, S. E., Fitt, R. N., McLarnon, E. L. & Wade, R. N. Defending the leaf surface: intra- and inter-specific differences in silicon deposition in grasses in response to damage and silicon supply. Front. Plant Sci. 6, 35. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2015.00035 (2015).

     Google Scholar 

110. Li, Z. Z. et al. Study of UV-shielding properties of novel porous hollow silica nanoparticle carriers for avermectin. Pest Manag. Sci. 63, 241–246. https://doi.org/10.1002/ps.1301 (2007).

     Google Scholar 

111. Rahman, A. et al. Larvicidal and antifeedant effects of copper nano-pesticides against Spodoptera frugiperda (JE Smith) and its immunological response. Insects 13, 1030. https://doi.org/10.3390/insects13111030 (2022).

     Google Scholar 

112. Guideline, P.-B.T. OECD guideline for the testing of chemicals. Hershberger 601, 858 (2001).

     Google Scholar 

113. Stache, F. et al. Quantification of soil microbial functional genes as potential new method in environmental risk assessment of pesticides. Ecotoxicology 34, 1312–1324. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10646-025-02920-w (2025).

     Google Scholar 

114. Mathur, J. & Goswami, P. Positive impact of green synthesized silica nanoparticles in plant growth promotion and physiological responses of Eruca sativa Mill. J. Soil Sci. Plant Nutr. 24, 2263–2275. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42729-024-01725-w (2024).

     Google Scholar 

115. Mitra, S. et al. Role of mesoporous silica nanoparticles in combating mercury-induced stress in Vigna radiata (mung bean) and Bacillus coagulans (soil bacteria). Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 30, 109343–109353. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-023-30088-5 (2023).

     Google Scholar 

Download references