Size reduction of selenium nanoparticles synthesized from yeast beta glucan using cold atmospheric plasma

Yeasts are single-celled microorganisms classified within the kingdom of Fungi. Unlike prokaryotic bacteria, which lack complex internal structures, yeasts are eukaryotic, possessing a well-defined cell wall and membrane-bound organelles like a nucleus and mitochondria¹. The yeast cell wall is a complex structure composed of various biomolecules. The major constituents include β-glucans (29–64%), mannan (31%), proteins (13%), lipids (9%), and chitin (1–2%). Among these, β-glucans and mannoproteins, both considered types of mannans, are the most functionally active components². β-glucan is a prominent polysaccharide, a complex sugar molecule, found in abundance within various natural sources³. This unique structure grants β-glucan a range of functional properties highly valuable in the food industry⁴. In food applications, β-glucan acts as a versatile tool for formulators. It functions as an emulsifier, stabilizer, and thickening agent, enhancing the texture and stability of various food products. Soups, sauces, beverages, and many others can benefit from the functional properties of β-glucan⁵. Beyond its food industry applications, β-glucan has garnered significant interest for its potential health benefits like disease diagnosis and treatment, Nutraceutical and functional food applications, anti-inflammatory and immune modulation, blood sugar and lipid management, and gut health^6,7,8. The prebiotic potential of β-glucans, particularly their ability to support the growth of beneficial gut microbiota, has been a key area of research interest⁹. Furthermore, β-glucan’s applications are expanding into various biotechnological fields, offering exciting possibilities for future advancements^10,11.

Selenium (Se) can be harmful to microorganisms and animals, including humans, at high concentrations^12,13,14. Selenium is a crucial micronutrient that is essential for maintaining human health. It exerts various beneficial functions within the body, including enhancing immune function, potentially reducing the risk of certain cancers, and protecting the cardiovascular system^15,16,17. Se is critical for metabolism, oxidative damage protection, thyroid hormones, DNA synthesis, and reproduction¹⁸. According to FAO/WHO guidelines, the maximum daily intake of Se should not exceed 400 μg/day. The recommended ideal daily intake of Se is between 26 and 35 μg for adults, with females typically requiring less than males¹⁹. Selenium-rich foods harbour a diverse array of Se compounds, including selenite (Se(IV), selenate (Se(VI), selenomethionine (SeMet), selenocysteine (SeCys₂), and methyl selenocysteine (MeSeCys)^20,21. Among the selenium species identified, Se(IV) and Se(VI) are classified as inorganic Se. Compared to their organic counterparts, inorganic Se forms are generally considered to exhibit less favourable biological safety profiles²². Crucially, the human body absorbs these Se species with varying efficiencies. Therefore, evaluating Se bioavailability in Se-rich foodstuffs is critical for accurately assessing their nutritional quality and expanding their potential applications¹³.

In soil and aquifer environments, microbial reduction processes can transform selenite and selenate oxyanions into inorganic SeNPs^23,24. SeNPs hold promise for widespread applications due to their ability to reduce Se toxicity while offering superior biological activity compared to elemental selenium^25,26. SeNPs are emerging as a promising material for applications in agriculture, food, and medicine due to their distinctive properties, including high biological activity, bioavailability, low toxicity, excellent particle dispersion, and a large surface area^27,28,29,30. Compared to organic and inorganic forms of selenium, SeNPs have been shown to exhibit both low toxicity and high bioavailability due to their nanoscale size³¹. Glucans possess good biocompatibility, bioactivity, and disperse SeNPs effectively, maintaining their stability and promoting synergistic functionalities³².

Despite the advantages of nanoscale selenium over bulk selenium, synthesizing Se nanoparticles (NPs) in aqueous solutions remains a complex task. A diverse range of methods, including biological, chemical, and physical, have been explored to produce SeNPs from ionic selenium solutions^{26,33,34,35,36}. Traditional methods for synthesizing SeNPs, such as electrochemical reactions and chemical reduction–oxidation, often struggle to control particle morphology and size, leading to inefficient and time-consuming processes^37,38,39. In contrast, biological synthesis offers several advantages, including low toxicity, cost-effectiveness, rapid synthesis, scalability, and a straightforward procedure⁴⁰.

Various studies have highlighted the influence of reducing agents, dispersants, their concentrations, the type of amine, and temperature on nanoparticle size⁴¹. Cold Atmospheric Plasma (CAP), a non-thermal technique that operates on the principle of partial ionization, offers a versatile approach to reducing nanoparticle size and enhancing their properties^42,43,44,45.

This study investigated the synthesis of Se nanoparticles using C-β-glucan extracted from the cell wall of K. marxianus M59, followed by size reduction with CAP. Characterization analyses (SEM, FT-IR, XRD) and various biological activities (antimicrobial, antibiofilm, antioxidant, and cytotoxicity) of the synthesized SeNPs were evaluated. This work, which presents a novel approach to reducing nanoparticle size using CAP, could potentially contribute to the expanding field of nanobiotechnology and future research.

Strains and culture conditions

K. marxianus M59 strain, found in the culture collection of Gazi University Department of Biology Biotechnology Laboratory, isolated from tulum cheese and molecularly identified by 18S RNA sequence analysis, was selected for experimental studies⁴⁶. YPD (Yeast Extract-Peptone-Dextrose, Merck) medium was used as a liquid medium, to develop the yeast. For pre-activation of microorganisms, 2% of samples were inoculated in a fluid medium and kept at 37 °C for 24–48 h.

For extraction of β-glucan extraction from K. marxianus M59

To β-glucan extraction from yeast strain M59, yeast culture was put into YPD broth at a rate of 2%, incubated at 37 °C for 48 h. This process was repeated twice for good yeast growth. After the incubation period, the yeast sample and the medium were mixed until homogeneous and then all of the samples were transferred to 2 L of YPD medium. The yeast sample transferred to the larger volume was again grown at 37 °C for 48 h. The samples were transferred to sterile large volume balconies and kept at 4000 rpm–15 min. The supernatant was discarded and yeast pellets were put in a flask and kept at 4 °C overnight. The next day, 30 mL of 0.3% sodium chloride (NaCl, Merck) was added to the sample and mixed until homogenized. The sample was kept overnight in a shaking oven (55 °C, 200 rpm) and then treated in a hot water bath (80 °C) for 10 min, followed by centrifugation (4000 rpm, 15 min). The supernatant was discarded again and pellet was collected in a sterile flask and kept at 4 °C overnight. The sample was added to 30 mL of 0.02% sodium phosphate buffer (pH 7.2) and treated in an autoclave at 121 °C for 240 min with the added glass beads (diameter: 0.5–1.0 mm, 12 g). When this process was finished, the glass beads were removed and then kept at 4000 rpm-15 min and pellet was stored at 4 °C overnight. Sterile distilled water was included to the sample to a final volume of 25 mL, sonicated for 10 min and then mixed for 1 min. This process was repeated twice in succession. The pellet of the sample was centrifuged again (4000 rpm, 15 min) and stored at 4 °C for 1 night. The sample was transferred to blotting paper and kept in the soxled device for 2.5 h. The same amount (1:1) of acetone (Merck) was added as the amount of sample obtained and centrifuged at 4000 rpm–10 min. Distilled water was added at a ratio of 1:1 and centrifuged again, the pellet was stored at 4 °C overnight. 0.3 g protease (Sigma) and 15 mL distilled water were added to the yeast pellet and kept in a shaking oven (55 °C, 200 rpm) for 5 h. The sample was put in a hot water bath (80 °C) for 10 min, then centrifuged at 4000 rpm-15 min. The supernatant was discarded, 15 mL of distilled water was included and centrifugation was performed again^47,48. The supernatant was discarded again and 5 mL of distilled water was added and the samples were transferred to vials (500 μL). After being kept in the freezer at − 80 °C for at least one night, they were placed in the lyophlizer device. Dry, powdered β-glucan was obtained from the sample kept in the device for 24 h (Fig. 1A).

Carboxymethylation

Since β-glucan obtained from yeast strain M59 was not water soluble, it was rendered water soluble by carboxymethylation. 90 mg of the obtained β-glucan was taken, 5.4 mL of isopropanol (Merck) was added and mixed in a magnetic stirrer until homogenized. 10 mL of 30% sodium hydroxide (NaOH, Merck) solution was added dropwise at 5–10 s intervals. The temperature of the magnetic stirrer was set to 50 °C and 1.1 g of monochloroacetic acid (MCA, Sigma) dissolved in 2.5 mL distilled water was added. The sample was kept covered in the heated magnetic stirrer for 6.5 h. At the end of the waiting period, the sample was cooled at room temperature and the pH was adjusted to 7. The following day, ethyl alcohol (98%, Merck) was added to the sample at a 1:1 ratio and the solution was filtered⁴⁹. The resulting filtrate was kept in the evaporator device at 90 °C for 5 h, then the sample was dissolved with 5 mL distilled water and transferred to vials (200–250 µL) (Fig. 2). The samples were kept overnight at − 80 °C and then placed in a lyophilizer and kept in the device for 24 h to obtain dry, powdered, water-soluble carboxymethylated β-glucan (C-β-glucan) (Fig. 1B).

Selenium nanoparticle synthesis from C-β-glucan-M59

SeNP synthesis from C-β-glucan–M59 was carried out according to Sun et al.⁵⁰. For the synthesis of suitable nanoparticles, a specific amount of C-β-glucan-M59, selenium dioxide (SeO₂, Sigma), potassium iodide (KI, Merck), and ascorbic acid (Merck) were utilized. The reaction mixture contained 20 mM SeO₂ and 30 mM KI at a 1:1 (v/v) ratio, which were mixed for 30 min before being added to the prepared C-β-glucan-M59 solution (1 mg/mL) and stirred for an additional 30 min. Subsequently, 60 mM ascorbic acid was added dropwise to reduce SeO₂ to zero-valent selenium in the C-β-glucan-M59 solution. A color change from orange to red was observed, indicating the formation of selenium nanoparticles. The solution was then agitated for 30 min. Centrifugation was conducted at 13,000 rpm-15 min, the synthesized nanoparticles were collected together (Fig. 3). The nanoparticles were washed with deionized water and dried after 5 min sonication.

UV–Vis spectroscopy analysis of SeNPs

UV–Vis spectroscopy was employed to examine the optical properties of the synthesized SeNPs. To prepare the samples for analysis, SeNPs were washed and diluted with deionized water. Subsequently, a 2 mL aliquot of each nanoparticle solution was added to a quartz cuvette. The samples were then scanned using a UV–Vis spectrophotometer (Hitachi, U-1800) within the wavelength range of 200–800 nm.

Characterization

Fourier Transform Infrared Spectroscopy (FT-IR), X-Ray Diffraction (XRD), and Scanning Electron Microscopy (SEM) analyses were carried out to elucidate the morphological and atomic structure of SeNPs synthesized from C-β-glucan extracted from the K. marxianus M59 cell wall.

SEM characterization

SEM is a powerful technique for investigating the size, morphology (shape), and elemental composition of nanomaterials. In this study, we employed SEM to analyze the morphological characteristics of the synthesized SeNPs. The nanoparticle samples were re-suspended in deionized water before SEM analysis. The SEM images were acquired using a Quanta 400F Field Emission SEM instrument. SEM analysis was carried out by ODTU MERLAB, Ankara, Turkey.

Cold atmospheric plasma (CAP) treatment of SeNPs

To determine the impact of CAP on nanoparticle size, the samples were treated with CAP for 5 min (Fig. 4). The study used a Cold Plasma system under atmospheric air supplied 600 W AC atmospheric plasma jet with 0–10 kV (Monoplasma, MP600). SEM analysis was performed to detect changes in size.

FT-IR spectrometer spectroscopy analysis

FT-IR spectrometer was used to determine the functional groups and biomolecules involved in the reduction of selenium ions. A concentrated solution of each type of nanoparticle was prepared in pure water. A small droplet of this solution was deposited onto a substrate that allows infrared transmission. The sample was then air-dried to remove the solvent completely. The dried sample was directly analyzed using a Bruker IFS 66/S FT-IR spectrometer equipped with a Hyperion 1000 microscope in transmission mode. This analysis was performed by ODTU MERLAB, Ankara, Turkey.

X-ray diffraction (XRD) analysis

XRD analysis was performed in ODTU Merlab to determine the crystal structure or phases in the nanoparticles. The XRD patterns of the samples were obtained using a Rigaku MiniFlex Desktop X-ray Diffractometer. The operating parameters were set at 40 kV and 15 mA, with a scan range of 3° to 90° 2θ using CuKα radiation (wavelength λ = 1.5406 Å).

Biological activity

Antimicrobial activity

The antimicrobial activity was designated using the agar well diffusion method^51,52. The antimicrobial activities of SeNP’s at various concentrations against Gram ( +) and Gram (−) pathogenic test bacteria (S. aureus ATCC 25,923, L. monocytogenes ATCC 7644, P. aeroginosa ATCC 29,212, and E. coli O157:H7) were examined separately. The test bacteria were cultured in Nutrient broth (Merck) and adjusted to a density of McFarland 0.5. One hundred microliters (µL) of each test bacteria suspension was inoculated onto solidified Nutrient agar and evenly spread. Subsequently, wells with a diameter of 7 mm (mm) were created in the agar. Different concentrations (1, 3, and 5 mg/mL) of the nanoparticle samples (100 µL each) were added to the wells. The plates were kept at 37 °C for 24 h. After incubation, the diameter of the zones was measured using callipers and the results were recorded in millimetres. Ampicillin antibiotic in the form of a disk was used as a control.

Antibiofilm activity

The antibiofilm activities of SeNPs were determined using a modified Khiralla and El-Deeb⁵³ method. Gram ( +) S. aureus ATCC 25,923 and L. monocytogenes ATCC 7644, Gram ( − ) P. aeruginosa ATCC 29,212 and E. coli O157:H7 were used as test bacteria. SeNP nanoparticles were prepared at concentrations of 1, 3, and 5 mg/mL and sonicated for 5 min. 20 µL of the homogenized samples were transferred to 96-well plates. Pathogen bacterial cultures were adjusted to McFarland 0.5 and 180 µL of bacterial culture was put into the well, waited at incubator for 24 h. Then, the wells were emptied to remove planktonic cells that had not formed a biofilm and washed 3 times with 250 μL PBS (0.01 mol/L KH₂PO₄/K₂HPO₄ ve 0.15 mol/L NaCI, pH: 7.0). After the plate dried, 150 μL of 99% methanol (Merck) was put into the well and waited at room temperature for 20 min. The wells were emptied again and 150 μL of 1% crystal violet solution (Merck) was added to stain the bacteria cells attached to the well surface. After 15 min of standing at room temperature, the wells were emptied again and washed under tap water. To dissolve the crystal violet dye, 150 μL of 33% glacial acetic acid (Merck) was put into the well and kept for 15 min. After all the procedures were completed, the plate was measured with an ELISA reader (Epoc, BioTek) at a wavelength of 570 nm^54,55.

The percentage rate of biofilm inhibition was designated according to the formula below.

A_Sample: The amount of light absorbed by the sample.

A_Control: The amount of light absorbed by the control.

Antioxidant activity

The antioxidant activity of SeNPs was detected by three methods using DPPH, superoxide anion, and hydroxyl radical scavenging activities.

DPPH radical scavenging effect

1 mL of nanoparticles (SeNPs) prepared at different concentrations (1, 3, and 5 mg/mL) were taken separately and 1 mL of DPPH solution (0.008% w/v in methanol) was added and mixed until homogeneous. Following a 30-min incubation in the dark, the absorbance was detected at 517 nm. Ascorbic acid (1 mg/mL) (Sigma-Aldrich) was used as the control^56,57.

B₅₁₇: The absorbance of nanoparticles treated with DPPH.

C₅₁₇: The absorbance of control group (DPPH solution).

Superoxide anion activity

0.2 mL of pyrogallol (3 mM, Sigma) was separately added to the nanoparticles prepared at different concentrations and the mixture was incubated for 5 min. Then, the reaction ended by adding 10 mM HCl and the absorbance was measured at 325 nm⁵⁸. Ascorbic acid (1 mg/mL) (Sigma-Aldrich) was used as the control.

A₁: Absorbance value of samples.

A₀: Absorbance value of the solution without sample.

Hydroxyl radical scavenging activity

1 mL brilliant blue (0.435 mM, Sigma), 2 mL FeSO₄ (0.5 mM, Sigma), and 1.5 mL H₂O₂ (%3, w/v Sigma) were put into the samples and incubated at 37 °C for 1 h. The absorbance was measured at 624 nm⁵⁹. Ascorbic acid (1 mg/mL) (Sigma-Aldrich) was used as the control.

(text{% Hydroxyl radical scavenging activity}=[(text{A}0-text{ A}1) / (text{A}-text{ A}1)]text{ x }100text{%})

A₀: The sample at a certain concentration.

A₁: The solution in the absence of sample.

A: The sample and the solution not containing the Fenton reaction system.

Cytotoxicity EFFECT of SeNP

The MTT was conducted to determine cell viability. To evaluate the cytotoxic impacts of synthesized nanoparticles, normal L929 and human lung cancer A549 cells were treated with different concentrations (12.5, 25, 50, 100, and 200 µg/mL) of the nanoparticles for 24 and 48 h. The experiments were carried out at the Central Research Laboratory Application and Research Center of Eskisehir Osmangazi University. Cell viability percentages for the experimental groups were calculated relative to the untreated control group using the following formula:

The cytotoxic of the applications were interpreted using ISO 10,993–5 standards (50% or more: high cytotoxic, 21–50%: moderate, 11–20%: low, and 10% or less: non-cytotoxic). The results were used to determine the IC₅₀ value.

Statistical analysis

All studies were conducted in three replicates and the average results of the values are given. Data obtained from these studies are presented as the mean of these replicates ± standard deviation. The statistical analyses (One-way ANOVA/Tukey tests and Pearson correlation) were carried out using SPSS Inc. Software 22.0.

UV–Vis spectrum of SeNPs

The synthesis of SeNPs from C-β-glucan-M59 was confirmed by a shift in color to orange-red (Fig. 3A). When the nanoparticles were scanned between 200 and 800 nm, an absorption peak was observed for SeNPs at 330 nm (Fig. 5). The result obtained overlaps with the range reported for the absorption peak of SeNPs (200–400 nm)²⁵. In Fath-Alla⁶⁰ study SeNP appeared at 360 nm. Faramarzi et al.⁶¹ declared that SeNPs was detected at 350 nm.

Characterization of SeNP

In this study, SEM images revealed that the SeNPs were spherical, with most particles measuring between 253 nm and 1.25 µm (Fig. 6A). We found that the size of the SeNPs synthesized from beta-glucan was larger than those synthesized from β-d-glucan obtained from the cell wall of Pythium aphanidermatum (a plant pathogen, 20–50 nm)⁶² and from 1,6-α-D-glucan obtained from Castanea mollissima (Chinese chestnut, 88.7, 61.3, and 53.7 nm)⁵¹. Nguyen et al.³⁹ observed that SeNPs synthesized in plasma were uniformly spherical with a size range of 50 to 100 nm by SEM analysis. Tilwani et al.⁶³ investigated SeNPs linked with EPS from E. faecium MC-5, observing that they formed clusters with a spherical and smooth structure. The nanoparticles were uniformly distributed, with sizes ranging from 10 to 83 nm. In another study, SEM analysis revealed that the biosynthesized SeNPs from halophilic bacteria were spherical with an average diameter of 49 nm⁶⁴. Alipour et al.⁶⁵ reported that SeNPs synthesized by Cyanobacterium Spirulina platensis were spherical with an average size of ~ 100 nm.

Nanoparticle size and morphology are crucial in nanotechnology, particularly for applications involving biological interactions. The size of nanoparticles significantly impacts their biocompatibility, performance, and ability to interact effectively with biological systems⁶⁶. While green synthesis offers environmentally friendly and biocompatible advantages⁶⁷, it can produce larger nanoparticles, as observed in our study. Physical methods, on the other hand, provide more precise control over nanoparticle size⁶⁸. Plasma, a physical synthesis method, offers precise control over nanoparticle properties, providing high purity, narrow size distribution, and desired crystalline structures^66,69.

The plasma method provides a versatile approach not only for the synthesis of nanoparticles but also for refining their size to nanoscale dimensions⁷⁰. The plasma method offers a versatile approach not only for synthesizing nanoparticles but also for refining their size to nanoscale dimensions. High-energy plasma ions can reduce nanoparticle size through sputtering and chemical reactions, while also increasing surface energy to promote size reduction^71,72.

The size, morphology, and stability of metal nanoparticles are strongly dependent on various physical and chemical reaction conditions, such as metal salt concentration, pH, reaction time, and temperature⁷³. By changing experimental parameters, an optimization study can be conducted to reduce nanoparticle size. Traditional experimental design methods often involve systematically varying one parameter while keeping others constant to assess its impact on system performance. However, this approach can be inefficient and costly, particularly when dealing with multiple variables at once^74,75. Therefore, in this study, instead of performing optimization experiments to reduce the nanoparticle size, Cold Atmospheric Plasma was used, which is a low-cost, time-efficient, and environmentally friendly approach.

SEM images (Fig. 6B) revealed a significant reduction in SeNPs particle size following CAP treatment. CAP-treated samples for 5 min displayed particle sizes between 83 and 180 nm. When comparing the average particle size of untreated SeNPs to that of CAP-treated SeNPs, a significant decrease of approximately 82.4% in particle size was observed after CAP treatment. This observation highlights the potential of CAP as an effective tool for controlling SeNP particle size. Therefore, CAP-treated (5 min) SeNP samples were used in all subsequent characterization and biological activity studies. In this study, according to elemental microanalysis results, we found pure elemental Se (Fig. 7), but the other researchers declared that besides existing selenium presence of other elements like sodium, oxygen, carbon^64,65,76,77.

FT-IR was used to identify the functional groups potentially attached to the surface of the nanoparticles. This technique provides valuable information about the chemical bonds present in the nanoparticle molecules or their composite structures⁷⁸. FT-IR spectrum of SeNP was exhibited in Fig. 8. The broad peak observed at 3271 cm⁻¹ arises from the stretching vibrations of -OH groups⁵¹. The band at around 2919 cm⁻¹ corresponded to the C–H stretching vibration of SeNPs. The absorption bands at 1631 cm⁻¹ indicate C=O stretching⁷⁹, while the bands between 1100 and 1000 cm⁻¹ belong to C–O stretching. Li et al.⁷⁶ investigated the FT-IR spectrum of SeNP stabilized by 1,6-α-D-glucan (CPA) and they reported that the hydroxyl peak in the cysteine hydrochloride spectrum (3436 cm⁻¹) shifted slightly to a lower wavenumber (3423 cm⁻¹) in the CPA-SeNPs spectrum. Chauhan et al.⁷⁷ used FT-IR analysis to examine mycogenic SeNPs. They found evidence of various functional groups, including O–H. Singh et al.⁸⁰ used FT-IR to confirm EPS-mediated stabilization and capping of SeNPs. They identified functional groups in EPS, including O–H, C–H, C=O, C–N, and –CH. Salem⁸¹ synthesized SeNPs using an extract of Saccharomyces cerevisiae. FT-IR analysis revealed functional groups involved in the interaction between capping agents and SeNPs. In Fath-Alla et al.⁶⁰, the absorption peaks at 3428.81 cm⁻¹, 2921.63 cm⁻¹, 1642.09 cm⁻¹, 1454.06 cm⁻¹, 1246.75 cm⁻¹, and 1045.23 cm⁻¹ correspond to stretching vibrations of O–H and N–H, C–H, C=O (amide bonds), carboxyl (–COOH), and C–O (carboxyl and ether groups), respectively.

Functional groups on the surface of selenium nanoparticles, such as –OH, –COOH, and –NH₂, play a key role in their biological activities. These groups influence the SeNPs’ surface charge, facilitating interactions with bacterial membranes and enhancing antibacterial activity. Hydrophilic groups improve SeNP stability in aqueous environments and prevent aggregation. Overall, the type and density of these functional groups are crucial in determining the SeNPs’ antibacterial, antioxidant, and cytotoxic effects.

XRD was employed to investigate the crystalline structure of the nanoparticles. In this study, the X-ray diffraction spectrum of SeNPs exhibited a broad peak at 2θ angles of 25–28° (Fig. 9). The absence of sharp peaks in the XRD pattern indicates that the biosynthesized SeNPs possess an amorphous structure²⁷, confirming their amorphous nature⁸². Sun et al.⁵⁰ used aminated yeast glucans (BNs) to synthesize SeNPs. X-ray diffraction (XRD) analysis revealed that the BNs/SeNPs composites had an amorphous structure, indicating that the SeNPs were not crystalline. In another study, XRD analysis showed that plasma-synthesized SeNPs had low crystallinity, with broad diffraction peaks at 23.5° and 29.7°³⁹. In Chauhan et al.’s⁷⁷ study, a typical XRD pattern of SeNPs showed eleven distinct, intense diffraction peaks at the following 2θ angles: 23.24°, 29.42°, 41.10°, 43.70°, 45.35°, 51.45°, 55.40°, 61.45°, 64.89°, 71.41°, and 77.29°. The presence of these peaks indicated the formation of a purified and crystalline structure of the SeNPs. Another study investigating the crystal structure of EPS-SeNPs revealed that the samples possessed an amorphous structure⁸⁰. Tilwani et al.⁶³ analyzed SeNPs using XRD (10–80° 2θ) and concluded that their association with EPS macromolecules led to an amorphous structure. Another study revealed that XRD analysis of SeNPs exhibited a monoclinic structure, with diffraction peaks at 2θ = 23.6°, 29.5°, 41.6°, 51.2°, and 66.6°, confirming their crystalline nature and high purity⁸¹.

According to the analysis results, selenium nanoparticles obtained from yeast beta-glucan exhibited an amorphous crystal structure, consistent with findings from other studies. This could suggest that the structural variations observed in amorphous SeNPs produced by different microorganisms are due to differences in the enzymes and functional groups involved in the reduction of selenium oxyanions³².

Antimicrobial activity

SeNPs exhibit antimicrobial activity through four primary mechanisms: metabolic disruption by interfering with intracellular adenosine triphosphate levels, modulation of intracellular Reactive Oxygen Species (ROS) levels, depolarization, and interruption of biological membranes^83,84. In this study, the antimicrobial activities of various concentration of SeNP (1, 3, and 5 mg/mL) against four pathogenic bacteria (E. coli O157:H7, S. aureus ATCC 25,923, P. aeroginosa ATCC 29,212, and L. monocytogenes ATCC 7644) were detected by an agar well diffusion method. The maximum inhibition zones 1.20 mm were found at 1 mg/mL SeNP against P. aeroginosa ATCC 29,212. In contrast no inhibition zones were observed all SeNP concentrations against S. aureus ATCC 25,923 (Table 1). In general, the antimicrobial activities of SeNPs synthesized from C-β-glucan isolated from K. marxianus M59 cell wall were very low or not observed against the pathogens tested at all SeNP concentrations.

In this study, the higher antibacterial activity of SeNPs at lower concentrations (1 mg/mL) may be attributed to several factors. First, the amorphous structure of the SeNPs could limit their biological interactions, as crystalline nanoparticles are generally more reactive. Although SeNPs were characterized as amorphous in this study, further structural analyses are necessary to evaluate the possibility of phase transitions occurring at higher concentrations. At lower concentrations, SeNPs may disperse more homogeneously, leading to more effective interactions with bacteria. This interaction could facilitate the binding of nanoparticles to bacterial cell membranes, thereby inhibiting their growth. Additionally, the sizes of the SeNPs in our study range from 180 to 83 nm, which may not be sufficient for some bacteria to effectively penetrate or interact with their cell membranes. These factors may contribute to the higher antibacterial activity of SeNPs at lower concentrations.

In another study where antimicrobial activity was determined, EPS (produce by LAB) was served as a stabilizer for selenium nanoparticle (EPS-SeNPs) synthesis, demonstrating the highest activity against S. aureus with an inhibition zone of 40.3 ± 0.57 mm, followed by Klebsiella pneumoniae, MRSA, and E. coli 35.3, 35.0, and 30.7 mm, respectively⁸⁴. El-Deeb et al.⁸⁵ declared that SeNPs using microorganisms demonstrated inhibition activity against S. aureus, MRSA, and E. coli, with inhibition zone diameters of 29, 27, and 13 mm, respectively. In another study, SeNPs synthesized using Enterococcus faecalis were tested for antibacterial activity via the disc diffusion method against Gram-positive (S. aureus, Bacillus subtilis) and Gram-negative bacteria (E. coli, P. aeruginosa). A zone of inhibition (8 mm) was observed only for S. aureus⁸⁶. Nguyen et al.³⁵ evaluated the bioactivity of plasma-synthesized SeNPs (400 ppm) against E. coli, S. aureus, and Candida albicans. The SeNPs showed inhibition zones of 27 mm for C. albicans, 12 mm for E. coli, and 20 mm for S. aureus. Iqbal et al.⁸⁷ found that SeNPs from Solanum lycopersicum displayed inhibition against K. pneumoniae, E. coli, and S. aureus with zone diameters of 24, 23, and 22 mm, respectively. Salem⁸¹ evaluated SeNPs against foodborne pathogens using the agar well diffusion method. SeNPs inhibited E. coli, S. aureus, Aspergillus fumigatus, and A. niger, with the largest zones for S. aureus (35.83 ± 1.25 mm) and A. fumigatus (34.9 ± 1.2 mm) at 1 mg/mL, and smaller zones for E. coli (22.1 ± 0.76 mm) and A. niger (22.3 ± 0.57 mm).

We observed a lower antimicrobial effect compared to previous studies. The divergence could be explained by synthesis source of selenium nanoparticles, different nanoparticle concentrations, and the test bacterial strains employed in our experiments. Furthermore, the use of beta-glucan extracted from yeast cell walls, rather than directly from the yeast, for the synthesis of selenium nanoparticles may have led to a decreased antimicrobial effect.

SeNPs exhibit a broad antimicrobial spectrum, effectively targeting bacteria, fungi, and even certain viruses. Their mechanisms of action include disrupting cell membranes, inactivating proteins and enzymes, inducing oxidative stress, damaging DNA, and inhibiting energy production^88,89. SeNPs bind to bacterial cell walls, causing structural changes and increased permeability, ultimately leading to cell death walls^90,91. Ionic interactions and biophysical mechanisms contribute to this process by disrupting cell membrane integrity and causing leakage of cytoplasmic contents death⁹².

Antibiofilm activity

The formation of biofilms can be a major issue, as it protects pathogenic bacteria from antibiotics and can lead to persistent infections⁹³. Bacterial attachment to surfaces marks the initial stage of biofilm formation. Adhesion proteins, flagella, and flagella-mediated motility, which govern bacterial attachment to various surfaces, represent potential therapeutic targets for nanoparticles to disrupt biofilm development⁹⁴.

In this research, the antibiofilm activity of different concentrations of SeNPs against four pathogens was evaluated and the results are presented in Table 2. The antibiofilm activities of SeNPs varied significantly among the pathogen bacteria used for each dose (p < 0.05). The findings showed that the highest biofilm inhibition was observed with 5 mg/mL SeNPs (43.6 ± 0.1%) against S. aureus ATCC 25,923. Conversely, the lowest activity was found with 1 mg/mL SeNPs (6.2 ± 0.1%) against E. coli O157:H7. Dose-dependent biofilm inhibition increased in S. aureus ATCC 25,923 and L. monocytogenes ATCC 7644 (p < 0.05).

In this study, the observed high antibiofilm activity of SeNPs, despite their low antibacterial activity, suggests that antibiofilm effects may be driven by a different mechanism. Antibiofilm activity is associated with the ability to prevent bacterial adhesion to surfaces and biofilm formation. This effect may arise not from direct interactions with bacterial cell walls or biofilm structures, but from SeNPs’ inhibition of biofilm formation. SeNPs can prevent biofilm formation without directly killing bacteria, often by disrupting intercellular communication (quorum sensing), blocking surface adhesion, or weakening the biofilm matrix. Therefore, while their antibacterial activity is limited, SeNPs may still exhibit significant antibiofilm effects.

SeNPs, which do not exhibit antibacterial activity through direct interaction with bacterial cell membranes, may inhibit biofilm formation at higher concentrations or with specific surface charges. This can be explained by SeNPs’ high surface area, the presence of functional groups on their surface, and their impact on biofilm inhibition. As a result, SeNPs may be effective in biofilm inhibition, even if they do not demonstrate antibacterial activity, because biofilm formation and bacterial cell adhesion mechanisms operate differently from classical antibacterial effects.

High concentrations of SeNPs hold promise as innovative antibiofilm agents, but further research is imperative to fully assess their efficacy. Shakibaie et al.⁹⁵ found that biologically synthesized SeNPs from Bacillus sp. MSh-1 inhibited biofilm formation by S. aureus, P. aeruginosa, and Proteus mirabilis with inhibition rates of 42.0%, 34.3%, and 53.4%, respectively. Mohammed et al.⁹⁶ reported that increasing doses of SeNPs from Aspergillus flavus reduced biofilm formation in a dose-dependent manner, with a maximum reduction of 78.8% at 125 μg/mL. A separate study on SeNPs produced by Stenotrophomonas maltophilia showed a 65% reduction in biofilm formation⁹⁷. Abu-Elghait et al.⁹⁸ found that myco-synthesized SeNPs reduced MRSA biofilm by 86.4%, while also reducing P. aeruginosa and C. albicans biofilms by 40.1% and 33.6%, respectively.

Our biofilm inhibition results were similar⁹⁵ or less effective than other researches. The observed differences could be attributed to a combination of factors, such as the test bacteria, the synthesis methods employed, and the experimental conditions. Moreover, variations in the synthesis sources are thought to significantly influence biofilm inhibition.

Research indicates that metal-based nanoparticles primarily target the extracellular polysaccharide matrix, disrupting biofilm mechanisms^94,99,100. This interaction can lead to physical damage of the bacterial membrane, ion release, and the generation of ROS, resulting in oxidative stress and DNA damage. Additionally, nanoparticles can interfere with cytoplasmic membrane condensation, bacterial metabolism, and extracellular polysaccharide production, ultimately altering biofilm and leading to their removal. The primary mechanisms of action for metal-based nanoparticles against microorganisms include ion release, ROS generation, membrane interactions, biofilm prevention, and biofilm removal^101,102. Additionally, SeNPs inhibit biofilm formation and induce oxidative stress, overwhelming the bacterial antioxidant system and limiting their viability^89,103.

Antioxidant activity

Selenium compounds exhibit strong antioxidant properties, neutralizing free radicals in vitro and increasing the activity of the selenoenzyme glutathione peroxidase, which plays a crucial role in preventing free radical damage to cells and tissues in vivo^93,104. The active hydroxyl groups within glucan structures contribute to their dispersing ability and potentially enhance the antioxidant, immunomodulatory, and anti-inflammatory activities observed with SeNPs. Glucan-stabilized SeNPs demonstrate remarkable biological activities, making them promising candidates for dietary supplements^50,105,106. In the current study, the antioxidant activity of the various concentrations of SeNP and ascorbic acid (control) was performed by the DPPH, superoxide anion, and hydroxyl radical scavenging activity methods. The antioxidant activities of SeNPs varied significantly among the methods used for each dose (p < 0.05). Antioxidant activity results are given in Table 3. According to the analysis results, it was determined that the antioxidant activity capacity increased with the increase in SeNP concentration in all three applied methods. The findings showed that the maximum antioxidant activity was found in the 5 mg/mL SeNP (47.7 ± 0.6%) by the DPPH method. In contrast, the lowest activity was detected at 1 mg/mL SeNP (19.5 ± 0.1%) by the hydroxyl radical scavenging activity method. Similarly, for ascorbic acid used as a control, the highest antioxidant activity was observed in the DPPH method (91 ± 0.4%). In contrast, the lowest activity was determined in the hydroxyl radical scavenging activity method (80 ± 0.6%).

Shehata et al.⁸⁴ assessed the antioxidant activity of EPS-SeNPs using a DPPH assay, finding a concentration-dependent increase in free radical scavenging, with antioxidant capacity ranging from 1.2 to 97.2%. Goud et al.¹⁰⁷ observed similar results for green-synthesized SeNPs, with a maximum DPPH scavenging activity of 79% at 500 μg/mL, though ascorbic acid was more effective (93%). In another study, SeNPs synthesized using S. cerevisiae showed a maximum antioxidant activity of 48.5% at 5 µg selenium salt¹⁰⁸. Alipour et al.⁶⁵ compared SeNPs and sodium selenite, finding SeNPs exhibited 1.1 to 2 times higher radical scavenging activity. Battin et al.¹⁰⁹ demonstrated that SeNPs protect DNA from oxidative damage by reducing free radical levels in both in vitro and in vivo conditions.

The chemical structure of the selenium compound and the type of metal ion involved in generating harmful hydroxyl radicals significantly influence selenium’s antioxidant behavior. These factors play a crucial role in determining how effectively selenium can safeguard DNA from oxidative harm. Several factors can influence the antioxidant capacity of nanoparticles, including methodological variations, the source material used for nanoparticle synthesis, preparation conditions, environmental factors, measurement techniques, chemical composition, growth conditions of the biological material from which it is isolated, and physiological state (growth phase, nutrient availability, synthesis temperature, and environmental conditions such as pH). According to the analysis results, SeNPs synthesized from C-β-glucan isolated from yeast cell walls exhibited antioxidant activity in three different methods. This, in turn, is thought to increase protection by preventing the damage caused by free radicals to cells and tissues.

Cytotoxicity of SeNP

The study investigated the cytotoxic effects of SeNPs on A549 and L929 cells over 24 and 48-h incubation periods. SeNPs exhibited non-cytotoxic effects on L929 cells, whereas a significant, dose- and time-dependent cytotoxicity was observed in A549 cells, indicating selective toxicity towards cancerous cells (Fig. 10). In A549 cells, Pearson correlation analysis revealed strong negative correlations between SeNP concentrations and cell viability, with coefficients of − 0.854 and − 0.841 at 24 and 48 h, respectively. The IC₅₀ value for L929 cells was determined to be > 200 µg/mL (411 and 390 µg/mL) at both 24 and 48 h of incubation. In contrast, the IC₅₀ value of SeNPs in A549 cells was calculated to be approximately 65 µg/mL at 24 h and 34 µg/mL at 48 h. Notably, cell viability remained below 50% across all tested concentrations, with the highest observed viability being 39% at 12.5 µg/mL. Given this trend, conducting experiments at lower doses (such as 6.25, 3.125, and 1.56 µg/mL) may provide further insight into the threshold at which Se-NPs exert their effects while potentially minimizing cytotoxic impact.

Concórdio-Reis et al.¹¹⁰ investigated the biocompatibility of SeNPs stabilized with extracellular polymeric substances (EPS) produced by the marine bacterium Alteromonas macleodii Mo 169. The EPS/SeNPs bio-nanocomposite was evaluated for cytotoxicity on human skin cell lines: CCD-1079Sk fibroblasts and HaCaT keratinocytes. Results indicated that while higher concentrations (500 and 1000 mg/L) of EPS/SeNPs bio-nanocomposite exhibited cytotoxicity (55% and 89%, respectively) lower concentrations (125 and 250 mg/L) did not substantial reduce cell viability. In another study, the cytotoxic potential of SeNPs was evaluated against Caco-2 cells using the MTT assay, with cell viability determined as a percentage relative to control cells (without stimuli). Exposure to SeNPs at concentrations of 0–200 ppm for 24 and 48 h resulted in cell viability exceeding 50%. Furthermore, treatment with 100 µg/mL SeNPs for 24 and 48 h led to cell viabilities of 83.1% and 78.8%, respectively, suggesting minimal cytotoxicity¹¹¹. Shin et al.¹¹² synthesized selenium nanoparticles (CS-SeNPs and AA-SeNPs) using Cirsium setidens extracts and ascorbic acid. The nanoparticles were found to be safe for normal fibroblast cells (NIH3T3) but toxic to human lung cancer cells (A549). In another study, the cytotoxic activity of biogenic SeNPs derived from the marine bacterial isolate Bacillus sp. MSh-1 against MCF-7 cells was evaluated using the MTT assay. The results showed that SeNPs induced 50% cell death at a concentration of 41.5 μg/mL¹¹³. The observed differences in results may be attributed to factors like the varying sensitivity of cell lines to metals, the size of the SeNPs, and the selenium content of the nanomaterials¹¹⁰.

The biological interactions and efficacy of SeNPs are significantly influenced by key physicochemical properties, including size, surface charge, shape, and surface modifications^114,115. In the Chandramohan et al.¹¹⁶ study, SeNPs with various morphologies—rods, spheres, and cubes—were synthesized using reducing agents such as BSA, D-glucose, and soluble starch. SeNPs from BSA were rod-shaped, with sizes ranging from 200 to 250 nm. The DPPH assay revealed that SeNPs synthesized with soluble potato starch exhibited the highest free radical scavenging activity (65%). In this study, spherical SeNPs with particle sizes ranging from 83 to 180 nm were synthesized. Despite obtaining smaller nanoparticles, the highest DPPH scavenging activity observed was 47.7%, which was lower than expected.

The shape of SeNPs also contributes to their biological behavior. Spherical nanoparticles provide uniform interactions with bacterial membranes, while elongated or rod-shaped particles possess a larger surface area, leading to improved antibacterial activity and better biofilm penetration^116,117. Yu et al.¹¹⁸ reported that chitosan, a derivative of chitin, promotes the formation and stabilization of spherical SeNPs, significantly enhancing their anticancer activity. Similarly, in our study, the synthesized SeNPs exhibited a spherical morphology and demonstrated no cytotoxic effect on normal cells (L929), while inducing a significant reduction in viable cell numbers in cancer cells (A549), indicating their selective cytotoxic potential^119,120.

1. Garvey, M. Non-Mammalian eukaryotic expression systems yeast and fungi in the production of biologics. J. Fungus. 8(11), 1179. https://doi.org/10.3390/jof8111179 (2022).

   Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

2. Korolenko, T. A., Bgatova, N. P. & Vetvicka, V. Glucan and mannan two peas in a pod. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 20(13), 3189 (2019).

   CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

3. Worrasinchai, S., Suphantharika, M., Pinjai, S. & Jamnong, P. Glucan prepared from spent brewer’s yeast as a fat replacer in mayonnaise. Food Hydrocoll. 20(1), 68–78. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodhyd.2005.03.005 (2006).

   Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

4. Li, C. et al. Microalgae in health care and functional foods: β-glucan applications, innovations in drug delivery and synthetic biology. Front. Pharmacol. 16, 1557298. https://doi.org/10.3389/fphar.2025.1557298 (2025).

   Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

5. Vaithanomsat, P. et al. Functionality of yeast β-glucan recovered from Kluyveromyces marxianus by alkaline and enzymatic processes. Polym. 14(8), 1582. https://doi.org/10.3390/polym14081582 (2022).

   Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

6. Bacha, U., Nasir, M., Iqbal, S. & Anjum, A. A. Nutraceutical, anti-inflammatory, and immune modulatory effects of β-glucan isolated from yeast. BioMed. Res. Int. 2017, 8972678. https://doi.org/10.1155/2017/8972678 (2017).

   Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

7. Geller, A., Shrestha, R. & Yan, J. Yeast-derived β-glucan in cancer: Novel uses of a traditional therapeutic. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 20(15), 3618. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms20153618 (2019).

   Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

8. Zhen, W. et al. Yeast β-glucan altered intestinal microbiome and metabolome in older hens. Front. Microbiol. 12, 766878. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2021.766878 (2021).

   Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

9. Gibson, G. R. et al. Expert consensus document: The International Scientific Association for Probiotics and Prebiotics (ISAPP) consensus statement on the definition and scope of prebiotics. Nat. Rev. Gastroenterol. Hepatol. 14(8), 491 (2017).

   PubMed  Google Scholar 

10. Korolenko, T. A., Bgatova, N. P., Ovsyukova, M. V., Shintyapina, A. & Vetvicka, V. Hypolipidemic effects of β-glucans, mannans, and fucoidans: Mechanism of action and their prospects for clinical application. Mol. 25(8), 2020. https://doi.org/10.3390/molecules25081819 (1819).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

11. Vetvicka, V. & Vetvickova, J. Anti-infectious and anti-tumor activities of β-glucans. Anticancer Res. 40(6), 3139–3145. https://doi.org/10.21873/anticanres.14295 (2020).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

12. Zhang, X., He, H., Xiang, J. Q. & Hou, T. Screening and bioavailability evaluation of anti-oxidative selenium-containing peptides from soybeans based on specific structures. Food Funct. 13(9), 5252–5261. https://doi.org/10.1039/d2fo00113f (2022).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

13. Du, C. et al. Investigation of selenium and selenium species in Cardamine violifolia using in vitro digestion coupled with a Caco-2 cell monolayer model. Food Chem. 444, 138675. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodchem.2024.138675 (2024).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

14. Lara, T. S. et al. Selenium application provides nutritional and metabolic benefits to wheat plants. Agronomy 14(3), 462. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy14030462 (2024).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

15. Yuan, L. J., Yuan, L. X., Yin, X. B. & Qin, L. Q. Physiological function, deficiency and ıts solutions on selenium: A review. Curr. Biotechnol. 6, 396–405 (2016).

    Google Scholar 

16. Farooq, M. R. et al. Characterization of selenium speciation in Se-enriched crops: Crop selection approach. J. Agric. Food Chem. 72(7), 3388–3396. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jafc.3c08116 (2024).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

17. Chen, C., Yang, Z., Ma, J., Xie, W. & Wang, Z. Recent research progress on the biological functions, synthesis and applications of selenium nanoparticles. J. Chromatogr. B. 124448 (2025). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jchromb.2024.124448.

18. Raza, A., Johnson, H., Singh, A. & Sharma, A. K. Impact of selenium nanoparticles in the regulation of inflammation. Arch. Biochem. Biophys. 732, 109466. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.abb.2022.109466 (2022).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

19. World Health Organization Guidelines for drinking-water quality: Incorporating the first and second addenda. WHO (2022).

20. Ye, M. et al. Selenium speciation in selenium-enriched plant foods. Food Anal. Methods. 15(5), 1377–1389. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12161-021-02208-9 (2022).

    Article  Google Scholar 

21. Qin, X., Wang, Z., Lai, J., Liang, Y. & Qian, K. The synthesis of selenium nanoparticles and their applications in enhancing plant stress resistance: A review. Nanomater. 15(4), 301. https://doi.org/10.3390/nano15040301 (2025).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

22. Zhao, B. et al. Distribution and accumulation of selenium in plants and health risk assessment from a selenium-rich area in China. Pol. J. Environ. Stud. 27(6), 2873–2882. https://doi.org/10.15244/pjoes/80693 (2018).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

23. Sarkar, J. et al. State-of-the-art systemic review on selenium nanoparticles: Mechanisms and factors influencing biogenesis and its potential applications. Biol. Trace Elem. Res. 201(10), 5000–5036. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12011-022-03549-0 (2023).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

24. Wang, D., Rensing, C. & Zheng, S. X. Microbial reduction and resistance to selenium: Mechanisms, applications and prospects. J. Hazard. Mater. 421, 126684. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2021.126684 (2022).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

25. Ramamurthy, C. H. et al. Green synthesis and characterization of selenium nanoparticles and its augmented cytotoxicity with doxorubicin on cancer cells. Bioprocess Biosyst. Eng. 36(8), 1131–1139. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00449-012-0867-1 (2013).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

26. Jia, X., Liu, Q., Zou, S., Xu, X. & Zhang, L. Construction of selenium nanoparticles/β-glucan composites for enhancement of the antitumor activity. Carbohydr. Polym. 117, 434–442. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carbpol.2014.09.088 (2015).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

27. Rasouli, M. Biosynthesis of selenium nanoparticles using yeast Nematospora coryli and examination of their anti-candida and anti-oxidant activities. IET Nanobiotechnol. 13(2), 214–218. https://doi.org/10.1049/iet-nbt.2018.5187 (2019).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

28. Kumar, A. & Prasad, K. S. Role of nano-selenium in health and environment. J. Biotech. 325, 152–163. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbiotec.2020.11.004 (2021).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

29. Cinar Acar, B., Yuksekdag, Z., Sahin, T., Acar, E. & Kara, F. Selenium nanoparticle (SeNP) synthesis through green synthesis. GUJS 4(1), 32–50 (2023).

    Google Scholar 

30. Yassein, A. S., Elamary, R. B. & Alwaleed, E. A. Biogenesis, characterization, and applications of Spirulina selenium nanoparticles. Microb. Cell Fact. 24(1), 39. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12934-025-02656-6 (2025).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

31. Wang, H., Zhang, J. & Yu, H. Elemental selenium at nano size possesses lower toxicity without compromising the fundamental effect on selenoenzymes: Comparison with selenomethionine in mice. Free Radic. Biol. Med. 42(10), 1524–1533. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.freeradbiomed.2007.02.013 (2007).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

32. Shi, X. D., Tian, Y., Wu, J. & Wang, S. Synthesis, characterization, and biological activity of selenium nanoparticles conjugated with polysaccharides. Crit. Rev. Food Sci. Nutr. 61(13), 2225–2236. https://doi.org/10.1080/10408398.2020.1774497 (2021).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

33. Yazdi, M. H., Mahdavi, M., Varastehmoradi, B., Faramarzi, M. A. & Shahverdi, A. R. The immunostimulatory effect of biogenic selenium nanoparticles on the 4T1 breast cancer model: An in vivo study. Biol. Trace Elem. Res. 149(1), 22–28. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12011-012-9402-0 (2012).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

34. Hien, N. Q. et al. Gamma Co-60 ray irradiation synthesis of dextran stabilized selenium nanoparticles and their antioxidant activity. Mater. Chem. Phys. 205, 29–34. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matchemphys.2017.11.003 (2018).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

35. Nguyen, D. N. et al. Preparation and effect of selenium nanoparticles/oligochitosan on the white blood cell recovery of mice exposed to gamma-ray radiation. J. Chem. 2021, 6635022. https://doi.org/10.1155/2021/6635022 (2021).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

36. Dung, N. T. et al. Radiation synthesis of selenium nanoparticles capped with β-Glucan and its immunostimulant activity in cytoxan-induced immunosuppressed mice. Nanomaterials 11(9), 2439. https://doi.org/10.3390/nano11092439 (2021).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

37. Ye, X., Chen, L., Liu, L. & Bai, Y. Electrochemical synthesis of selenium nanoparticles and formation of sea urchin-like selenium nanoparticles by electrostatic assembly. Mater. Lett. 196, 381–384. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matlet.2017.03.072 (2017).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

38. Ionin, A. et al. Milligram-per-second femtosecond laser production of Se nanoparticle inks and ink-jet printing of nano photonic 2D-patterns. Appl. Surf. Sci. 436, 662–669. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apsusc.2017.12.057 (2018).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

39. Nguyen, T. H. et al. Solution plasma process and bioactivity against yeast and bacteria for selenium nanoparticle synthesis in an ethanol–water mixture. Waste Biomass Valoriz. 14(2), 583–591. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12649-022-01919-2 (2023).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

40. Sharma, D., Kanchi, S. & Bisetty, K. Biogenic synthesis of nanoparticles: A review. Arab. J. Chem. 12, 3576–3600. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arabjc.2015.11.002 (2019).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

41. Yaqoob, A. A., Umar, K. & Ibrahim, M. N. M. Silver nanoparticles: Various methods of synthesis, size affecting factors and their potential applications—A review. Appl. Nanosci. 10(5), 1369–1378 (2020).

    CAS  Google Scholar 

42. Chang, R. et al. Structural modification and functional improvement of starch nanoparticles using vacuum cold plasma. Int. J. Biol. Macromol. 2020(145), 197–206. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2019.12.167 (2020).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

43. Torres, F. G. & De-la-Torre, G. E. Synthesis, characteristics, and applications of modified starch nanoparticles: A review. Int. J. Biol. Macromol. 194, 289–305. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2021.11.187 (2022).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

44. Biryukov, M. et al. Cold atmospheric plasma jet and conjugates of gold nanoparticles with tyrp1 antibodies efficiently suppress growth of B16 tumor. Plasma Med. 15(1), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1615/PlasmaMed.2025057895 (2025).

    Article  Google Scholar 

45. Cinar Acar, B. Impact of different application parameters of cold atmospheric plasma on foodborne pathogen ınactivation. MRT. 0: 1–15 https://doi.org/10.1002/jemt.24838 (2025).

46. Maihebubai, A. Investigation of probiotic properties of yeasts isolated from cheeses. Gazi University Graduate School of Natural And Applied Sciences, Ph.D. Thesis. 139. (2017).

47. Liu, X. Y., Wang, Q., Cui, S. W. & Liu, H. Z. A new isolation method of β-dglucans from spent yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Food Hydrocoll. 22(2), 239–247. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodhyd.2006.11.008 (2008).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

48. Magnani, M. et al. Optimized methodology for extraction of (1 → 3)(1 → 6)-β-d-glucan from Saccharomyces cerevisiae and in vitro evaluation of the cytotoxicity and genotoxicity of the corresponding carboxymethyl derivative. Carbohydr. Polym. 78(4), 658–665. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carbpol.2009.05.023 (2009).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

49. Kagimura, F. Y. et al. Carboxymethylation of (1→ 6)-β-glucan (lasiodiplodan): Preparation, characterization and antioxidant evaluation. Carbohydr. Polym. 127, 390–399. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carbpol.2015.03.045 (2015).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

50. Sun, Y. et al. Synthesis, characterization and anti-inflammatory activity of selenium nanoparticles stabilized by aminated yeast glucan. Int. J. Biol. Macromol. 245, 125187. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2023.125187 (2023).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

51. Menon, S., Agarwal, H., Rajeshkumar, S., Jacquline Rosy, P. & Shanmugam, V. K. Investigating the antimicrobial activities of the biosynthesized selenium nanoparticles and its statistical analysis. Bionanoscience 10, 122–135. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12668-019-00710-3 (2020).

    Article  Google Scholar 

52. Yuan, Q., Xiao, R., Afolabi, M., Bomma, M. & Xiao, Z. Evaluation of antibacterial activity of selenium nanoparticles against food-borne pathogens. Microorganisms 11(6), 1519. https://doi.org/10.3390/microorganisms11061519 (2023).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

53. Khiralla, G. M. & El-Deeb, B. A. Antimicrobial and antibiofilm effects of selenium nanoparticles on some foodborne pathogens. LWT-FST 63(2), 1001–1007. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lwt.2015.03.086 (2015).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

54. Miglani, S. & Tani-Ishii, N. Biosynthesized selenium nanoparticles: Characterization, antimicrobial, and antibiofilm activity against Enterococcus faecalis. PeerJ 9, e11653 (2021).

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

55. Aakef, J. N. A. & Yuksekdag, Z. Determination of some biological activities of yeast derived synbiotic and postbiotic+prebiotic applications. JAES 8(1), 51–61. https://doi.org/10.35229/jaes.1211758 (2023).

    Article  Google Scholar 

56. Ayyash, M., Olaimat, A., Al-Nabulsi, A. & Liu, S. Q. Bioactive properties of novel probiotic Lactococcus lactis fermented camel sausages: Cytotoxicity, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibition, antioxidant capacity, and antidiabetic activity. Food Sci. Anim. Resour. 40(2), 155–171. https://doi.org/10.5851/kosfa.2020.e1 (2020).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

57. Marzhoseyni, Z., Raski, S. & Halidi, A. Antibacterial, antibiofilm, and antioxidant impacts of usnic acid against vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus. Polym. Bull. 81, 10337–10350. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00289-024-05206-z (2024).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

58. Balakrishnan, B. et al. In vitro antioxidant and antibacterial properties of hydrolysed proteins of delimed tannery fleshings: Comparison of acid hydrolysis and fermentation methods. Biodegradation 22, 287–295. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10532-010-9398-0 (2011).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

59. Wang, K. et al. Physicochemical characterization and antioxidant activity of cell-bound exopolysaccharides from Lactobacillus fermentum S1 obtained by two extraction methods. Process Biochem. 85, 195–205. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procbio.2019.06.017 (2019).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

60. Fath-Alla, A. A., Khalil, N. M., Mohamed, A. S. & Abd El-Ghany, M. N. Antiradical and anti-inflammatory activity of Saccharomyces cerevisiae-mediated selenium nanoparticles. Egypt. J. Bot. 64(2), 773–787 (2024).

    Google Scholar 

61. Faramarzi, S., Anzabi, Y. & Jafarizadeh-Malmiri, H. Nanobiotechnology approach in intracellular selenium nanoparticle synthesis using Saccharomyces cerevisiae—Fabrication and characterization. Arch. Microbiol. 202(5), 1203–1209 (2020).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

62. Anusuya, S. & Sathiyabama, M. Preparation of β-d-glucan nanoparticles and its antifungal activity. Int. J. Biol. Macromol. 70, 440–443. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2014.07.011 (2014).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

63. Tilwani, Y. M., Lakra, A. K., Domdi, L., Jha, N. & Arul, V. Preparation, physicochemical characterization, and in vitro biological properties of selenium nanoparticle synthesized from exopolysaccharide of Enterococcus faecium MC-5. BioNanoScience 13(2), 413–425. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12668-023-01077-2 (2023).

    Article  Google Scholar 

64. Annamalai, K. K., Selvaraj, B., Subramanian, K., Binsuwaidan, R. & Saeed, M. Antibiofilm and antivirulence activity of selenium nanoparticles synthesized from cell-free extract of moderately halophilic bacteria. Microb. Pathog. 193, 106740. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.micpath.2024.106740 (2024).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

65. Alipour, S., Kalari, S., Morowvat, M. H., Sabahi, Z. & Dehshahri, A. Green synthesis of selenium nanoparticles by cyanobacterium Spirulina platensis (abdf2224): Cultivation condition quality controls. BioMed Res. Int. 1, 6635297. https://doi.org/10.1155/2021/6635297 (2021).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

66. Kant, T. et al. Design and development of conductive nanomaterials for electrochemical sensors: A modern approach. Mater. Today Chem. 24, 100769. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.MTCHEM.2021.100769 (2022).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

67. Samuel, M. S. et al. A review on green synthesis of nanoparticles and their diverse biomedical and environmental applications. Catalysts 12(5), 459. https://doi.org/10.3390/catal12050459 (2022).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

68. Harish, V. et al. Cutting-edge advances in tailoring size, shape, and functionality of nanoparticles and nanostructures: A review. J. Taiwan Inst. Chem. Eng. 149, 105010. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtice.2023.105010 (2023).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

69. Ali, A. et al. Review on recent progress in magnetic nanoparticles: Synthesis, characterization, and diverse applications. Front. Chem. 9, 629054. https://doi.org/10.3389/fchem.2021.629054 (2021).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

70. Vollath, D. Plasma synthesis of nanoparticles. KONA Powder Part J. 25, 39–55. https://doi.org/10.14356/kona.2007007 (2007).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

71. Zhu, F. et al. The dispersion study of TiO₂ nanoparticles surface modified through plasma polymerization. Phys. E: Low-Dimens Syst. Nanostruct. 27(4), 457–461 (2005).

    CAS  Google Scholar 

72. Sonawane, A., Mujawar, M. A. & Bhansali, S. Effects of cold atmospheric plasma treatment on the morphological and optical properties of plasmonic silver nanoparticles. Nanotechnology 31(36), 365706. https://doi.org/10.1088/1361-6528/ab9788 (2020).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

73. Bala, A. & Rani, G. A review on phytosynthesis, affecting factors and characterization techniques of silver nanoparticles designed by green approach. Int. Nano Lett. 10(3), 159–176 (2020).

    CAS  Google Scholar 

74. Kutahyalı, C., Sert, S., Cetinkaya, B., Yalçıntaş, E. & Acar, M. B. Biosorption of Ce (III) onto modified Pinus brutia leaf powder using central composite design. Wood Sci. Technol. 46(4), 721–736. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2011.11.047 (2012).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

75. Cinar Acar, B. & Yuksekdag, Z. Investigation of chromium (III) adsorption on acid-treated bentonite evaluation of kinetic/thermodynamic data. Water Air Soil Poll. 234(11), 716. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11270-023-06727-5 (2023).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

76. Li, H., Liu, D., Li, S. & Xue, C. Synthesis and cytotoxicity of selenium nanoparticles stabilized by α-D-glucan from Castanea mollissima Blume. Int. J. Biol. Macromol. 129, 818–826. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2019.02.085 (2019).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

77. Chauhan, R., Bhargava, P., Singh, A., Prasad, R. & Goel, A. Exploring the impact of mycogenic selenium nanoparticles on production of exopolysaccharides from arid zone bacteria. ISBAB 60, 103313. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bcab.2024.103313 (2024).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

78. Eid, M. M. Characterization of nanoparticles by FTIR and FTIR-microscopy. In Handbook of consumer nanoproducts, pp. 1–30. (Singapore: Springer Singapore, 2022).

79. Ullah, A. et al. Biosynthesis of selenium nanoparticles (via Bacillus subtilis BSN313), and their isolation, characterization, and bioactivities. Mol. 26(18), 5559. https://doi.org/10.3390/molecules26185559 (2021).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

80. Singh, A., Dey, P., Mihara, H., Prakash, N. T. & Prakash, R. Facile synthesis of selenium nanoparticles and stabilization using exopolysaccharide from endophytic fungus, Nigrospora gullinensis, and their bioactivity study. Biomass Convers Bior. 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13399-024-05870-1(2024)

81. Salem, S. S. Bio-fabrication of selenium nanoparticles using baker’s yeast extract and its antimicrobial efficacy on food borne pathogens. Appl. Biochem. Biotechnol. 194(5), 1898–1910. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12010-022-03809-8 (2022).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

82. Sarkar, J., Dey, P., Saha, S. & Acharya, K. Mycosynthesis of selenium nanoparticles. Micro Nano Lett. 6(8), 599–602. https://doi.org/10.1049/mnl.2011.0227 (2011).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

83. Hashem, A. H. & Salem, S. S. Green and ecofriendly biosynthesis of selenium nanoparticles using Urtica dioica (stinging nettle) leaf extract: Antimicrobial and anticancer activity. Biotechnol. J. 17(2), 2100432. https://doi.org/10.1002/biot.202100432 (2022).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

84. Shehata, N. S., Elwakil, B. H., Elshewemi, S. S., Ghareeb, D. A. & Olama, Z. A. Selenium nanoparticles coated bacterial polysaccharide with potent antimicrobial and anti-lung cancer activities. Sci. Rep. 13(1), 21871 (2023).

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

85. El-Deeb, B., Al-talhi, A., Mostafa, N. & Abou-assy, R. Biological synthesis and structural characterization of selenium nanoparticles and assessment of their antimicrobial properties. ASRJETS 45, 135–170 (2018).

    Google Scholar 

86. Shoeibi, S. & Mashreghi, M. Biosynthesis of selenium nanoparticles using Enterococcus faecalis and evaluation of their antibacterial activities. J. Trace Elem. Med. Biol. 39, 135–139. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtemb.2016.09.003 (2017).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

87. Iqbal, M. S., Abbas, K. & Qadir, M. I. Synthesis, characterization and evaluation of biological properties of selenium nanoparticles from Solanum lycopersicum. Arab. J. Chem. 15(7), 103901. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arabjc.2022.103901 (2022).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

88. Matai, I., Pandey, S. K., Garg, D., Rani, K. & Sachdev, A. Phytogreen synthesis of multifunctional nano selenium with antibacterial and antioxidant implications. Nano Express. 1(1), 010031. https://doi.org/10.1088/2632-959X/ab8bea (2020).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

89. Ao, B. et al. A review on synthesis and antibacterial potential of bio-selenium nanoparticles in the food industry. Front. Microbiol. 14, 1229838. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2023.1229838 (2023).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

90. Galbadage, T. et al. Molecular nanomachines disrupt bacterial cell wall, increasing sensitivity of extensively drug-resistant Klebsiella pneumoniae to meropenem. ACS Nano 13(12), 14377–14387. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsnano.9b07836 (2019).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

91. Cittrarasu, V. et al. Green synthesis of selenium nanoparticles mediated from Ceropegia bulbosa Roxb extract and its cytotoxicity, antimicrobial, mosquitocidal and photocatalytic activities. Sci. Rep. 11, 1032. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-80327-9 (2021).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

92. Linklater, D. P. et al. Antibacterial action of nanoparticles by lethal stretching of bacterial cell membranes. Adv. Mater. 32(52), e2005679. https://doi.org/10.1002/adma.202005679 (2020).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

93. Ramya, S., Shanmugasundaram, T. & Balagurunathan, R. Biomedical potential of actinobacterially synthesized selenium nanoparticles with special reference to anti-biofilm, anti-oxidant, wound healing, cytotoxic and anti-viral activities. J. Trace Elem. Med. Biol. 32, 30–39. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtemb.2015.05.005 (2015).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

94. Dharul Salam, F. et al. Anti-bacterial and anti-biofilm efficacies of bioinspired gold nanoparticles. Mater. Lett. 261, 126998. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matlet.2019.126998 (2020).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

95. Shakibaie, M., Forootanfar, H., Golkari, Y., Mohammadi-Khorsand, T. & Shakibaie, M. R. Anti-biofilm activity of biogenic selenium nanoparticles and selenium dioxide against clinical isolates of Staphylococcus aureus, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, and Proteus mirabilis. J. Trace Elem. Med. Biol. 29, 235–241. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtemb.2014.07.020 (2015).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

96. Mohammed, E. J. et al. Biomedical promise of Aspergillus flavus-biosynthesized selenium nanoparticles: A green synthesis approach to antiviral, anticancer, anti-biofilm, and antibacterial applications. Pharmaceuticals 17(7), 915. https://doi.org/10.3390/ph17070915 (2024).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

97. Cremonini, E. et al. Biogenic selenium nanoparticles synthesized by Stenotrophomonas maltophilia Se ITE 02 loose antibacterial and antibiofilm efficacy as a result of the progressive alteration of their organic coating layer. Microb. Biotechnol. 11(6), 1037–1047. https://doi.org/10.1111/1751-7915.13260 (2018).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

98. Abu-Elghait, M., Hasanin, M., Hashem, A. H. & Salem, S. Ecofriendly novel synthesis of tertiary composite based on cellulose and myco-synthesized selenium nanoparticles: Characterization, antibiofilm and biocompatibility. Int. J. Biol. Macromol. 175, 294–303. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2021.02.040 (2021).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

99. Khan, F. et al. Synthesis and characterization of chitosan oligosacchar ide-capped gold nanoparticles as an effective antibiofilm drug against the Pseudomonas aeruginosa PAO1. Microb. Pathog. 135, 103623. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.micpath.2019.103623 (2019).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

100. Luo, L., Huang, W., Zhang, J., Yu, Y. & Sun, T. Metal-based nanoparticles as antimicrobial agents: A review. ACS Appl. Nano Mater. 7(3), 2529–2545 (2024).

     CAS  Google Scholar 

101. Hussein, N. & Khadum, M. M. Evaluation of the biosynthesized silver nanoparticles effects on biofilm formation. J. Appl. Sci. Nanotechnol. 1, 23–31. https://doi.org/10.53293/jasn.2021.11019 (2021).

     Article  Google Scholar 

102. Allemailem, K. S. et al. Ajwa-Dates (Phoenix dactylifera)-mediated synthesis of silver nanoparticles and their anti-bacterial, anti-biofilm, and cytotoxic potential. Appl. Sci. 12(9), 4537. https://doi.org/10.3390/app12094537 (2022).

     Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

103. Mourenza, A., Gil, J. A., Mateos, L. M. & Letek, M. Oxidative stress-generating antimicrobials, a novel strategy to overcome antibacterial resistance. Antioxidants 9, 361. https://doi.org/10.3390/antiox9050361 (2020).

     Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

104. Zhang, J., Zhang, S. Y., Xu, J. J. & Chen, H. Y. A new method for the synthesis of selenium nanoparticles and the application to construction of H₂O₂ biosensor. Chin. Chem. Lett. 15, 1345–1348 (2004).

     CAS  Google Scholar 

105. Qiu, W., Wang, Y., Wang, M. & Yan, J. Construction, stability, and enhanced antioxidant activity of pectin-decorated selenium nanoparticles. Colloids Surf. B: Biointerfaces 170, 692–700. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.colsurfb.2018.07.003 (2018).

     Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

106. Cai, L. et al. The composites of triple-helix glucan nanotubes/selenium nanoparticles target hepatocellular carcinoma to enhance ferroptosis by depleting glutathione and augmenting redox imbalance. Chem. Eng. J. 446, 137110. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cej.2022.137110 (2022).

     Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

107. Goud, K. G., Veldurthi, N. K., Vithal, M. & Reddy, G. Characterization and evaluation of biological and photocatalytic activities of selenium nanoparticles synthesized using yeast fermented broth. J. Mater. NanoSci. 3(2), 33–40 (2016).

     Google Scholar 

108. Faramarzi, S., Anzabi, Y. & Jafarizadeh-Malmiri, H. Nanobiotechnology approach in intracellular selenium nanoparticle synthesis using Saccharomyces cerevisiae-fabrication and characterization. Arch. Microbiol. 202(5), 1203–1209. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00203-020-01831-0 (2020).

     Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

109. Battin, E. E., Zimmerman, M. T., Ramoutar, R. R., Quarles, C. E. & Brumaghim, J. L. Preventing metal-mediated oxidative DNA damage with selenium compounds. Metallomics 3(5), 503–512. https://doi.org/10.1039/C0MT00063A (2011).

     Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

110. Concórdio-Reis, P. et al. Selenium bio-nanocomposite based on Alteromonas macleodii Mo169 exopolysaccharide: Synthesis, characterization, and in vitro antioxidant activity. Bioengineering 10(2), 193. https://doi.org/10.3390/bioengineering10020193 (2023).

     Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

111. Bagheri-Josheghani, S. & Bakhshi, B. Investigation of the antibacterial and antibiofilm activity of selenium nanoparticles against vibrio cholerae as potent therapeutics. Can. J. Infect. Dis. Med. Microbiol. 1, 3432235. https://doi.org/10.1155/2022/3432235 (2022).

     Article  Google Scholar 

112. Shin, S. et al. Functionalization of selenium nanoparticles using the methanolic extract of Cirsium setidens and its antibacterial, antioxidant, and cytotoxicity activities. J. Nanostruct. Chem. 12(1), 23–32. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40097-021-00397-7 (2022).

     Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

113. Forootanfar, H. et al. Antioxidant and cytotoxic effect of biologically synthesized selenium nanoparticles in comparison to selenium dioxide. J. Trace Elem. Med. Biol. 28(1), 75–79. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtemb.2013.07.005 (2014).

     Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

114. Luesakul, U., Komenek, S., Puthong, S. & Muangsin, N. Shape-controlled synthesis of cubic-like selenium nanoparticles via the self-assembly method. Carbohydr. Polym. 153, 435–444. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carbpol.2016.08.004 (2016).

     Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

115. Zambonino, M. C. et al. Biogenic selenium nanoparticles in biomedical sciences: Properties, current trends, novel opportunities and emerging challenges in theranostic nanomedicine. Nanomaterials 13(3), 424. https://doi.org/10.3390/nano13030424 (2023).

     Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

116. Chandramohan, S., Sundar, K. & Muthukumaran, A. Reducing agents influence the shapes of selenium nanoparticles (SeNPs) and subsequently their antibacterial and antioxidant activity. Mater. Res. Express 6(8), 0850i2 (2019).

     CAS  Google Scholar 

117. Stepankova, H. et al. Unveiling the nanotoxicological aspects of Se nanomaterials differing in size and morphology. Bioact. Mater. 20, 489–500. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bioactmat.2022.06.014 (2023).

     Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

118. Yu, B., Zhang, Y., Zheng, W., Fan, C. & Chen, T. Positive surface charge enhances selective cellular uptake and anticancer efficacy of selenium nanoparticles. Inorg. Chem. 51(16), 8956–8963. https://doi.org/10.1021/ic301050v (2012).

     Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

119. Zhang, H. et al. Antibacterial properties and mechanism of selenium nanoparticles synthesized by Providencia sp. DCX. Environ. Res. 194, 110630. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envres.2020.110630 (2021).

     Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

120. Raturi, P., Ahmad, N., Rawat, N. & Singhvi, N. Synthesis and biomedical based applications of selenium nanoparticles: A comprehensive review. Indian J. Microbiol. 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12088-024-01302-w (2024).

121. Vijayakumar, S. et al. A review on biogenic synthesis of selenium nanoparticles and its biological applications. JIOPM 32(7), 2355–2370 (2022).

     CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors and Affiliations

1. Faculty of Science, Department of Biology, Gazi University, 906500, Ankara, Turkey

   Berat Cinar-Acar

Contributions

BCA: Data Curation, Investigation, Writing-Original Draft; Conceptualization, Supervision, Statistical Analysis.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Berat Cinar-Acar.

Competing interest

The authors declare no competing interests.

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License, which permits any non-commercial use, sharing, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if you modified the licensed material. You do not have permission under this licence to share adapted material derived from this article or parts of it. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/.

Reprints and permissions