Download Effect of nanoparticles on the activity of the electrone ion pumps in

Research Article
Trends in Nanotechnology & Material Science
Effect of nanoparticles on the activity of the electrone ion pumps in
plasmatic membrane of plant cells
Ramazanov M.A1,Ahmadov I.S1, Ramazanli V.N2, Agayeva N.J3
Department of Chemical physics of nanomaterials, Baku State University,
Azerbaijan,e-mail:[email protected], [email protected]
2
Department of Biophysics and molecular biology, Baku State University,
Azerbaijan, e-mail: [email protected]
3
Depatment of ecobiology, Baku State University, Azerbaijan,e-mail:nergiz.
[email protected]
1
Corresponding author:
Ahmadov I., Associate professor, Baku State University, AZ1148, Z.Khalilov
str.23,Baku, Tel:+994503350923, E-mail:[email protected]
Copyright: © 2015 Ramazanov M.A, Ahmadov I.S, Ramazanli V.N,
Agayeva N.J, et al. This is an open-access article distributed under the
terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits
unrestricted use, distribution,and reproduction in any medium, provided
the original author and source are credited.
Citation: © Ramazanov M.A, Ahmadov I.S, Ramazanli V.N, Agayeva
N.J, (2015) Effect of nanoparticles on the activity of the electrone ion
pumps in plasmatic membrane of plant cells. Trends in Nanotechnology
& Material Sciencee. 1: 1-5
Received Date: Jun 20, 2016
Accepted Date: : July 05, 2016
Published Date: July 20, 2016
Abstract
In this research work has been studied the effect of nanoparticles on the activity of H+-ATFase and redox system
during their interaction with plasmatic membrane of plant cells. It was found that nanoparticles change the electrical
parameters of plasmatic membrane depending on the type, concentration and duration of exposure. 21 nm ZrO2 vә
Al+Ni nanoparticles depolarize membrane potential much more and mostly affect H+-ATFase electrogenic proton
pumps activity. Nanoparticles don’t impact seriously on the redox type proton pumps.
Keywords: nanoparticles, plasmatic membrane, membrane potential, membrane resistance, ion pumps, H + ATFase, redox pump.
Introduction
The experiments, carried out on plants are of great importance in investigating the interaction of nanoparticles with living systems. In order to
determine the interaction of nanoparticles with plants, their toxity, firstly
must be studied their adsorption mechanisms with plants, their activity in
organs, accumulation in cells and tissues. There is significant evidence that
the interaction nanoparticles with the cellular membrane changes their
structure and function. Nanoparticles enhance porosity of membranes,
activates the proton pumping, which is one of main function of plasma
membran of plant cells. The proton-pumping by the H+ -ATPase or redox
chain in plant plasma membrane generates the proton motive force across
the plasma membrane that is necessary to activate most of the ion and
metabolite transport. The plasma membrane proton pumps creates the pH
and potential difference across the plasma membrane required by secondary transporters whose activity is directly dependent upon the proton motive force. In plants, the plasma membrane H‡-ATPase also participates in
other functions essential for normal plant growth such as salt tolerance,
intracellular pH regulation and cellular expansion (Pierre M. & Marc B.,
2000). Jae-Hwan Kim and his colleagues (2015) in his investigation found
that exposure of Arabidopsis thaliana to nano zerovalent iron (nZVI) triggered high plasma membrane H+ -ATPase activity. The increase in activity
caused a decrease in apoplastic pH, an increase in leaf area, and also wider
stomatal aperture. Zaruhi V. and et.all (2015) showed that Ag nanoparticles directly affected membranes, as the FOF1-ATPase activity and H+coupled transport was changed and Ag nanoparticles increased H+ and
K+ transport even in the presence of N,N'-dicyclohexylcarbodiimide
(DCCD), inhibitor of FOF1. The stoichiometry of DCCD-inhibited ion
fluxes was disturbed.
Uptake of nanoparticle is described as a two-step process, where the
nanoparticles initially adhere to the cell membrane and subsequently are
internalized by the cell via energy-dependent path ways. Researches made
lately show that nanoparticles can enter the plant cells through membrane
by two ways. Nanoparticles with size less 5 nm directly enter into the cell
excelyticspublishers.com
by the chanals or pores of membrane, but bigger ones by endocytosis way
(Jaspreet K. Vasir and Vinod Labhasetvar, 2008).
Figure 1.The changes occuring in lipid membrane structure during the interaction
of nanoparticles with
1- α- dimyristoil phosphatidylcholine double lipid membrane (Yuri Roiter,
et al., 2008)
American scientists identified that spheric and smooth nanoparticles with
the size of 1-22 nm make a hole keeping the integrality of double lipid
layer membrane and can pass into the membrane (figure 1). But spheric
nanoparticles with bumpy surface violates the lipid membrane integrality
and membrane collapses (Yuri Roiter et al.,2008). Using electrophysiological method it was determined that all types of spheric silica nanoparticles
in phemtomol concentration can pass double lipid membrane. The more
nanoparticle concentration the less double lipid layer stability and membrane injured (Maurits R. R. de Planque et al., 2011). And nanoparticles
with different surface charges have been observed forming concentration
of memebrane potential (CP70 vә A2780) in muscle cells of human respiratory tract and in ovarian cancer cells and also depolarization depending
on exposure duration. The amount of this depolarization can be compared
with the depolarization made by 40 mM KCI solution (Rochelle R.Arvizo
et al.,2010).
Comparing the toxic effects of nanoparticles with the toxic effects of 20
Ahmadov I
Volume 1| Issue2|Page 1
nm, cerium oxide - CeO2 and 40 nm titanium dioxide - TiO2 in human
bronchial alveol cancer cells (A549) caused by aluminum oxide - AI2O3
nanoparticles of size 13 and 22 nm, it was determined that nanoparticles depolarize the membrane potential. The value of depolarization depends on the size of nanoparticles. The depolarization caused by 13 nm
size Al2O3 nanoparticles was much more than the depolarization of 30
nm. The most depolarization was observed during the influence of CeO2
nanoparticles (Lin Weisheng and et.all, 2008). It becomes clear from scientific reference review dedicated to the interaction of nanoparticles with
cell membranes that nanoparticles can create various membrane effects
depending on the size, surface charges, form and type. They create pores
in double lipid layers of biologycal membranes, can destroy them, can directly pass and depolarize membrane potential and so on. The majority of
toxic effects caused by nanoparticles in cells is the outcome of structural
and functional changes occurred in biological membranes. Therefore, any
toxic factor effect is the result of injury occurred in biologycal membranes.
Figure 2. The change kinetics of MP in light-dark transition and Fe(CN)6
influence.
In further experiments has been studied the short-term influence of
nanoparticles (5-10 min.). The experiments showed that during some
minutes` influence nanoparticles don`t affect MP and MM. Based on reference review nanoparticles passing through the plasmatic membrane by
endocytosis way can enter the cell. Therefore, to study the nanoparticle
impact in Elodea leaves and Trianea roots (not leaving the stem) which
were kept for 3, 5, 7 and 10 days in IPV solution which included nanoparticles. At first, the change kinetics of electrical parameters in plasmatic
membrane has been identified depending on the size of nanoparticles,
density and exposure duration. In figure 3, MP change kinetics has been
presented in the dark-light transitions in Elodea leaves kept at ordinary
light for 3 days in suspensional solution of 21nm size ZrO2 nanoparticles.
We therefore supposed that the presence of nanoparticles in surface of plasma membrane and their transport through them may change the function
of H+-ATPase or redox- chain activity in plant plasma membrane and
thus tried highlight which of proton pumps more sensitive to the nanoparticles. it is important in terms of identifying toxicity of nanoparticles.
MATERIALS AND METHODS.
As the investigation objects were used higher aqueous plants Elodea Canadensis leaves from Hydrocharitaceae family widely imposed in electrophysiological experiments, and root cells of Trianea bogotensis plant. The
dispers solution of (pH=7) nanoparticles used in experiments, containing
10-3 M NaCl, 10-4 M KCl, 10-4 M CaCl2 was prepared in artificial pool
water. Iron oxide - Fe2O3 (8 nm), titanium dioxide - TiO2 ( 10 nm), zinc
oxide - ZnO (30 nm), copper (II) oxide - CuO (40 nm), aluminum - Al,
aluminium & nickel composite - Al+Ni (100 nm) vә zirconium dioxide
- ZrO2 (21, 42 vә 100 nm) nanoparticles were used in experiments. Electrical parameters of plasmatic membrane potential (MP) and membrane
resistance (MR) have been measured by the microelectrode method.
THE RESULTS OF EXPERIMENTS AND THEIR DISCUSSION.
All plant cells have an electrical potential across the plasma membrane
driven by an ion gradient. Under standard conditions the ion gradient
will result in a -100 to -300 mV potential across the membrane with a
net negative charge on the cytosolic face. The results of measurement in
microelectrode show that the light value of MP in Elodea cells is 200-300
mV, in Trianea root cells 100-180 mV interval. In plant cells MP value
measured in microelectrode is much more from the theoretical calculated
value (110-130 mV) according Nernst and Qoldman equations and that
means the role of active ion transport in MP generation is considerably
greater. In initial experiments light-dark transitions in Elodea leave and
cells the change kinetics of MP during ferrisianid - Fe(CN)6 influence
were watched. Due to this, 5 min. later after input the electrode into the
Elodea cells under the microscope, the light was switched off at stable MP
value and after 10 minutes was switched on again. Meantime MP depolarizing decreased from 205 mV to 100 mV. When the light switched on
again depolarizing achieved 265 mV value. At light regime during the
IPV+ 5.10-4 M Fe(CN)6 influence 90 mV depolarization was observed.
The results of experiments have been given in figure 2. The main aim in
these experiments has been to verify the activity of H+-ATFaze type proton pump and redox electron pumps in normal conditions participating
in MP generation.
Figure 3. MP change kinetics in Elodea leaves kept in ZrO2 nanoparticle solution
of 21 nm size.
As seen from the figure ZrO2 nanoparticles in Elodea cells didn`t affect
MP greatly. But during dark- light transitions the depolarization and hyperpolarization watched in normal leaves underwent to serious changes.
The influence of Fe(CN)6 ( Ferricyanid) was as in normal cells. In figure
4 were given the results of experiments showing the MP changes depending on the size of nanoparticles and exposure duration. Nanoparticles of
Elodea leaves in various sizes were kept for 3, 5, 12 days. As seen from
figure 4, the change of MP value mostly has been in nanoparticles of size
21 nm. In experiments of iron(II,III) oxide - Fe3O4, Al, Al+Ni Elodea
leaves with other nanoparticles the influence on MP value has been studied. MP change was studied in dark-light transitions after keeping Elodea
leaves in the solution of AI and Al+Ni, Fe3O4 nanoparticles for a long
time- 20 days.
The results showed that the impact of nanoparticles depends on the keeping of leaves in the light or dark, exposure duration. During short-term
influence of Fe3O4 nanoparticles which were solved in IPV at 0,1 mg/ml
doze, any changes weren`t observed in cells, MP value doesn`t change.
Interesting results have been observed during the long-term influence of
Fe3O4 nanoparticles. It was identified that long-term influence of Fe3O4
nanoparticles depends on the light-dark regime. In the light Elodea leaves
kept in Fe3O4 nanoparticles lose their nativity more quickly, metobolizm
stops in cells and the leaves get yellow. But if the leaves kept Fe3O4
nanoparticles in the dark maintain their nativity for 20 days. In cells the
protoplasma activity remains stable.
Figure 4. The MP change in Elodea leaves depending on the size and exposure duration of ZrO2 nanoparticles.
excelyticspublishers.com
Ahmadov I
Volume 1| Issue2|Page 2
MR influence they were kept in solutions prepared in IPV of Trianea
plant nanoparticles for 24 hours and more time. Observations showed that
nanoparticles didn`t influence on the root growth in Trianea plant. But if it
remains for a long time the development of roots, cell division delayed in
solution of AL+Ni nanoparticle composites. MR value decreased mainly
Al and Ni nanoparticles. The results of experiments were given in figure 7.
Figure 5. MP change kinetics in Elodea leaves kept in the light (A) and dark (B) in
the Fe3O4 nanoparticle solution for 20 days.
In figure 5 during light-dark transition and under ferricyanid influence MP
change kinetics in Elodea leaves kept in the solution of Fe3O4 nanoparticles in the light (A) and in the dark (B) for 20 days has been given. The
results of these experiments showed that in leaves kept in Fe3O4 nanoparticle solution in dark MP value is in the 190-200 mV interval when the
leaves are illuminated.
This value of MP doesn`t differ much from normal leaves. During lightdark transition MP depolarized and its value is 100 mV and after the leaves
were illuminated hyperpolarizing again increases to 225 mV. The same
experiments were carried out in leaves kept in light. It became clear that in
Elodea leaves kept in Fe3O4 nanoparticle solution in the light the active
part of MP is completely lost, only its passive part remained, MP value was
80-100 mV interval. In most cells during light-dark transition slightly depolarization of MP was observed. In some cells this reaction is completely
lost. But Fe(CN)6 reaction was watched (figure 5, B).
Figure 6. The change kinetics of MP and membrane resistance in Trianea
root cells.
In experiments membran resistance influence of Fe3O4, Al, Al+Ni
nanoparticles has been studied. As the size of Trianea trichoblast cells is
bigger by input two microelectrodes it is possible to measure at the same
time both MP and electrical resistance of plasmatic membrane without
damaging them. For this purpose two microelectrodes was input into the
cell. One microelectrode measures the MP value, by the second microelectrode stable current impulses are given. The amount of stable current
inputted into the cell is very little I=10-9 A. During input of current the
MP is changing in dependencies on the direction of current, the positive
current was depolarized, but the negative current results in membrane
hyperpolarization. Current is given as impulse. The duration of impulse is
3-5 second. Membrane resistance is calculated due to Om law
R = ∆Ψ/I
equation. Here ∆Ψ is landslide of membrane potential during current
including, I- is the amount of stable current (figure 6). In order to study
excelyticspublishers.com
Figure 7. The change of MR in Trianea root cells kept in nanoparticles for
24 hours. 1-control; 2- Fe3O4; 3 - Al; 4 -Al+Ni.
The investigation of influence mechanisms of nanoparticles as a physycal
and chemical factor on plasmatic membrane structure and function in
plant cells gives an opportunity from one side to determine their toxic
peculiarities, on the other hand to identify the nature of changes occurring in plasmatic membrane during the interaction in nanoparticles. Cell
MP is the integral indication of its physiological state and depends on cell
metobolism. MP in plant cells is generized as the result of both active ion
pumps and also passive diffusion channel activities. The activity of active
ion pumps in cells depends on metobolism level and its change happens
as the result of violation of some fundamental prosesses (photosynthesis,
respiration and so on ). Therefore, the studying of MP kinetics in cells with
this or other factor influence gives information about active ion pumps
function in plasmatic membrane. As noted above two types of active proton pumps parallel activate in plant cells. One of these is H-ATFase proton
complex, the second is short electron chain (redox system). Nanoparticles
can affect both proton pump activities. The results of some experiments
show that nanoparticles create free radicals, oxidize lipids in cell membranes, change its structure and function, being sucked into the cell affect
on important unicellular prosesses as photosynthesis, breathing, protein
synthesis, transport, the expression of genes. The most interesting sphere
in studying the influence of nanoparticles in cell level are the experiments
dedicated to the identification of their interaction nature with plasmatic
membrane.
During the enterance of nanoparticles into the plant cells and their interaction with plasmatic membrane three mechanisms are offered. I mechanism: nanoparticles can`t pass the plasmatic membrane, accumulated on
its surface. Nanoparticles which accumulated on plasmatic membrane can
seriously affect on its function though they can`t do serious changes on its
structure. The surface of nanoparticles is very active, they can do electron
exchange, create free radicals, can change the surface charges of membrane. So, nanoparticles, especially metal nanoparticles can make changes in active and passive channel functions which responsible for the ion
transportation in plasmatic membrane. It becomes clear that by studying
MP and MR influence of nanoparticles some of the taken nanoparticles
(Fe3O4, Al and Al+Ni, ZrO2) can pass the membrane, but some can`t
pass.
Due to the I mechanism if the nanoparticles can`t pass plasmatic membrane staying on its surface can do electron exchange with redox system.
These peculiarities of nanoparticles give an opportunity to change the activity of redox proton pumps in plasmatic membrane. MP depolarization
of Al+Ni nanocomposite shows that it gets the electrons from redox system and stops its activity. In mechanism II, nanoparticles create pores in
Ahmadov I
Volume 1| Issue2|Page 3
plasmatic membrane and pass through channels containig protein. At that
time nanoparticles can pass directly destroying double lipid layer or combining with protein moleculars can pass double lipid layer. Nanoparticles
have the peculiarity of passing through the membrane being covered with
proteins, therefore in order to pass through plasmatic membrane easily
they are covered with specific proteins. Such nanoparticles pass through
membrane with simplified transport prosess mechanism. When nanoparticles pass through membrane they can change the function of active and
passive ion channels. In experiments with ZrO2 nanoparticles depending on their sizes various results have achieved in MP change kinetics.
In leaves kept at 21 nm size ZrO2 nanoparticles during dark-light-dark
transitions MP change kinetics considerably alters. Differing from normal
cells MP induced by light disappears in cells kept in ZrO2 nanoparticles.
But ferricyanid influence in normal cells remains as before (figure 3,5). In
leaves kept in 42 nm ZrO2 nanoparticles the light induced MP remains as
in normal cells. Due to the results of these experiments we can suppose
that 21 nm ZrO2 nanoparticles pass through the plasmatic membrane by
the second mechanism. Meantime they cause serious changes in channels
of protein nature and in special passive channels. May be these nanoparticles damage H-ATFase complex. During ferricyanid influence the strong
depolarization of MP shows that redox system wasn`t injured. In this case
100 nm size nanoparticles perhaps accumulating on the surface of plasmatic membrane mechanically affected it. So, during both light-dark and
also ferricyanid influence indefinite changes were observed (Fig.3,4,5).
One of the interesting experiments is the iron nanoparticle experiment.
If Elodea leaves are kept in Fe2O3 nanoparticle solution for a long time
serious physiological changes were observed. These changes depend on
the keeping of leaves in the light or dark. If the leaves are kept in the light
in metal nanoparticle solution the metabolism violated in them, pigment
content collapes, leaves get yellow in a short time. In this case, metal
nanoparticles can pass in by III mechanism-endocytosis way and seriously injure photosynthesis prosess. It may be as the result of fenton reaction increase. In leaves kept in metal nanoparticle solution for a long time
the active part of MP completely disappeares. MP value is 90-100 mV size,
but the influence of Fe(CN)6 is still observed (figure 3,4). But in leaves
kept in the metal nanoparticles in darkness haven’t been watched any
serious physiological changes. MP value is 190-200 mV and in the darklight transitions MP change kinetics remains as in normal cells. Meantime redox system function doesn’t change. The interesting thing is that,
if Elodea leaves remain in the nanoparticles in darkness for a long time
the redox system works more strongly. In order to confim this idea additional experiments are needed. The measurement of plasmatic membrane
resistence can be the result of prosesses occurring in its structure. Due to
the results of experiments it becomes clear that, the influence of Al+Ni
nanocomposite results in the structure changes in plasmatic membrane.
Thus, in Trianea cells kept in Al+Ni nanocomposite MR acutely decreases.
It may be due to the formation of holes on the lipid layer in membrane. If
nanoparticles don’t change MP and MR then they enter the cell by endocytosis way. In the experiments iron and aluminum nanoparticles don’t
change MP and MR so acutely. If nanoparticles don’t even pass the membrane, they “sitting” on their surface close ion channels and can violate
their potential dependence function. As nanoparticles are surface active
substances they can activate as electron donor and acceptor. And that can
make important changes in redox system activity. After a long exposure if
nanoparticle change the value of MP it means that nanoparticle entering
the cell violated important physiological prosesses (photosynthesis, respiration, protein synthesis etc.). The changes occurring in the membrane
structure can be better identified if membrane electrical resistence is measured with the MP together. Therefore during studying the influence of
nanoparticles it is necessary to watch MR together with MP. The aim of
experiments with nanoparticles is also to identify the nature of interaction mechanism of nanoparticles with membrane systems. In these experiments can be studied how the nanoparticles are toxic or which biological
prosesses they stimulate in cells.
excelyticspublishers.com
Conclusion
Our electrophysiology studies show that during transport of nanoparticles
across the plasma membrane (mostly by way of endocytosis) of plant cells
changes the structure and functions of plasma membrane depending on
the size, concentration and exposure time of nanoparticles. The exposure of cells in nanoparticles solutions results to the depolarization of MP
and decrease of MR. The effect of nanoparticles in green cells depends
on light-dark regime of environment. The analyses of experiments allow
us conclude that, when nanoparticles are at interaction with plasmatic
membrane of cells they are mostly at interaction with H-ATFase type of
electrogenic proton pump. The H-ATFase proton pump more sensitive
than redox type of proton pump to the nanoparticles. Having an impact
on their activity nanoparticles change the mineral nutrition of plant cells.
One can estimate the toxity of nanoparticles which are in interaction with
plasmatic membrane before they form lethal effects for cells. The damage
happening in plasmatic membrane then may play an important role in life
activity of cells.
References
1. I. S. Ahmadov, M. A. Ramazanov, A. Sienkiewicza, L. Forro, “Uptake
and intracellular trafficking of superparamagnetic iron oxide nanoparticles (spions) in plants”, Digest Journal of Nanomaterials and Biostructures
9 (3), (2014), pp. 1149 – 1157.
2. I. Ahmadov, M. Crittin, R. Khalilov, M. Ramazanov, M. Schaer, P. Matus,
R. Digigow, A. Fink, L. Forró, and A. Sienkiewicz, “Tracking up‐conversion nano‐phosphors and superpara magnetic iron oxide nano particles
in aquatic plants: ESR and confocal microscopy assays”, SSD 10th edition
Paul Scherrer Institute Villigen, March 4th,(2013), pp.123-124.
3. Axel Fleischer, Malcolm A. O'Neill , and Rudolf Ehwald, “The Pore Size
of Non-Graminaceous Plant Cell Walls Is Rapidly Decreased by Borate
Ester Cross-Linking of the Pectic Polysaccharide Rhamnogalacturonan II”,
Plant Physiology , 121(3), (1999 ), pp. 829-838.
4. N. Carpita, McCann, “Cell Walls”, In Biochemistry & Molecular Biology
of Plants. Chapter 2, (2000), pp.512-523.
5. Cyren M. Rico, Sanghamitra Majumdar, Maria Duarte-Gardea, Jose R.
Peralta-Videa and Jorge L. Gardea-Torresdey, “Interaction of Nanoparticles with Edible Plants and Their Possible Implications in the Food Chain”,
J. Agric. Food Chem, 59, (2011), pp. 3485–3498.
6. Jae-Hwan Kim, Youngjun Oh, Hakwon Yoon, Inhwan Hwang, and
Yoon-Seok Chang, “Iron Nanoparticle-Induced Activation of Plasma
Membrane H+ ATPase Promotes Stomatal Opening in Arabidopsis thaliana”, Environ. Sci. Technol. 49, (2015), pp.1113−1119.
7. A. Fleischer , C. Titel , R. Ehwald, “The boron requirement and cell wall
properties of growing- and stationary-phase suspension-cultured Chenopodium album L. cells”, Plant Physiol 117, (1998), pp.1401–1410.
8. Lin Weisheng; Stayton Isaac; Huang,Ma, Yinfa, “Cytotoxicity and cell
membrane depolarization induced by aluminum oxide nanoparticles in
human lung epithelial”, Toxicological and Environmental Chemistry,
90(5), (2008) , pp. 983-996
9. C. Lin, B. Fugetsu, Y. Su, F.Watari, “Studies on toxicity of multi-walled
carbon nanotubes on Arabidopsis T87 suspension cells”, J. Hazard. Mater.
170, (2009), pp.578–583.
10. S. Lin, J. Reppert, , Q. Hu, J. S.Hudson, M. L. Reid, T. A. Ratnikova,
A. M. Rao, H. Luo, P. C. Ke, “Uptake, translocation, and transmission of
carbon nanomaterials in rice plants”, Small, 5,(1), (2009), pp. 128–1132.
11. Pierre Morsomme, Marc Boutry, “ The plant plasma membrane H+ATPase: structure, function and regulation”, Biochimica et Biophysica
Acta (BBA) - Biomembranes, 1465, (1–2), 1 (2000), pp. 1–16.
12. R. R. de Planque Maurits, Sara Aghdaei , Tiina Roose and Hywel Morgan, “Electrophysiological Characterization of Membrane Disruption by
Nanoparticles”, ACS Nano, 5 (5), (2011) , pp 3599–360.
Ahmadov I
Volume 1| Issue2|Page 4
13. S.M. Read, A. Bacic, “Cell wall porosity and its determination in Modern Methods of Plant Analysis”, eds Linskens H-F, Jackson JF (Springer
Verlag, Berlin), 17: Plant Cell Wall Analysis, 63(80), (1996), pp.111-118.
nanoparticles on Enterococcus hirae and Escherichia coli growth and
proton-coupled membrane transport”, Journal of Nanobiotechnology. 13
(69), ( 2015) , pp.11-19
14. Yuri Roiter, Maryna Ornatska , Aravind R. Rammohan , Jitendra Balakrishnan, etg, “Interaction of Nanoparticles with Lipid Membrane”,
Nano Lett., 8(3), (2008) pp. 941–944.
16. Wang, Qiang Dennis, “Phytotoxicity of silver nanoparticles to Arabidopsis thaliana in hydroponic and soil systems”, MAI. 50/01, (2012), February, pp. 21-28.
15. Zaruhi Vardanyan,Vladimir Gevorkyan, Michail Ananyan, Hrachik
Vardapetyan andArmen Trchounian, “Effects of various heavy metal
excelyticspublishers.com
Ahmadov I
Volume 1| Issue2|Page 5