Abstract
There is lack of information about the effects of nanoparticles (NPs) on cucumber fruit quality. This study aimed to determine possible impacts on carbohydrates, proteins, mineral nutrients, and antioxidants in the fruit of cucumber plants grown in soil treated with CeO2 and ZnO NPs at 400 and 800 mg/kg. Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy (FTIR) was used to detect changes in functional groups, while ICP-OES and μ-XRF were used to quantify and map the distribution of nutrient elements, respectively. Results showed that none of the ZnO NP concentrations affected sugars; however at 400 mg/kg, CeO2 and ZnO NPs increased starch content. Conversely, CeO2 NPs did not affect starch content but impacted nonreducing sugar content (sucrose). FTIR data showed changes in the fingerprint regions of 1106, 1083, 1153, and 1181, indicating that both NPs altered the carbohydrate pattern. ZnO NPs did not impact protein fractionation; however, CeO2 NPs at 400 mg/kg increased globulin and decreased glutelin. Both CeO2 and ZnO NPs had no impact on flavonoid content, although CeO2 NPs at 800 mg/kg significantly reduced phenolic content. ICP-OES results showed that none of the treatments reduced macronutrients in fruit. In case of micronutrients, all treatments reduced Mo concentration, and at 400 mg/kg, ZnO NPs reduced Cu accumulation. μ-XRF revealed that Cu, Mn, and Zn were mainly accumulated in cucumber seeds. To the best of the authors' knowledge this is the first report on the nutritional quality of cucumber fruit attributed to the impact of CeO2 and ZnO NPs.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record, shown for indexing and research. Copyright remains with the authors or the publisher. Read at the source ↗
The text the model read, with the source record’s inline markup (italics, sub- and superscripts) rendered and its character entities decoded; quote offsets refer to the raw text.
Claims 17
Claim · model-written summary
ZnO nanoparticles did not affect cucumber fruit sugars at either tested concentration.
- Taxon
- Cucumis sativus
Cucumis sativust0e2e3
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“none of the ZnO NP concentrations affected sugars”
t0“Cucumber (Cucumis sativus)”
e2“at 400 mg/kg, CeO2 and ZnO NPs increased starch content”
e3“none of the ZnO NP concentrations affected sugars”
Claim · model-written summary
CeO2 nanoparticles at 400 mg/kg increased cucumber starch.
- Taxon
- Cucumis sativusCucumis sativust0e2e3
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“at 400 mg/kg, CeO2 and ZnO NPs increased starch content”
t0“Cucumber (Cucumis sativus)”
e2“at 400 mg/kg, CeO2 and ZnO NPs increased starch content”
e3“none of the ZnO NP concentrations affected sugars”
Claim · model-written summary
ZnO nanoparticles at 400 mg/kg increased cucumber starch.
- Taxon
- Cucumis sativusCucumis sativust0e2e3
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“at 400 mg/kg, CeO2 and ZnO NPs increased starch content”
t0“Cucumber (Cucumis sativus)”
e2“at 400 mg/kg, CeO2 and ZnO NPs increased starch content”
e3“none of the ZnO NP concentrations affected sugars”
Claim · model-written summary
CeO2 nanoparticles did not affect starch in the reported contrasting result.
- Taxon
- Cucumis sativusCucumis sativust0e2e3
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“CeO2 NPs did not affect starch content but impacted nonreducing sugar content (sucrose).”
t0“Cucumber (Cucumis sativus)”
e2“at 400 mg/kg, CeO2 and ZnO NPs increased starch content”
e3“none of the ZnO NP concentrations affected sugars”
Claim · model-written summary
CeO2 nanoparticles affected fruit sucrose content.
- Taxon
- Cucumis sativusCucumis sativust0e2e3
Not reportedComparatorDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“CeO2 NPs did not affect starch content but impacted nonreducing sugar content (sucrose).”
t0“Cucumber (Cucumis sativus)”
e2“at 400 mg/kg, CeO2 and ZnO NPs increased starch content”
e3“none of the ZnO NP concentrations affected sugars”
Claim · model-written summary
CeO2 nanoparticles altered the fruit carbohydrate pattern.
- Taxon
- Cucumis sativusCucumis sativust0e2e3
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“both NPs altered the carbohydrate pattern.”
t0“Cucumber (Cucumis sativus)”
e2“at 400 mg/kg, CeO2 and ZnO NPs increased starch content”
e3“none of the ZnO NP concentrations affected sugars”
Claim · model-written summary
ZnO nanoparticles altered the fruit carbohydrate pattern.
- Taxon
- Cucumis sativusCucumis sativust0e2e3
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“both NPs altered the carbohydrate pattern.”
t0“Cucumber (Cucumis sativus)”
e2“at 400 mg/kg, CeO2 and ZnO NPs increased starch content”
e3“none of the ZnO NP concentrations affected sugars”
Claim · model-written summary
ZnO nanoparticles did not affect protein fractionation.
- Taxon
- Cucumis sativusCucumis sativust0e2e3
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“ZnO NPs did not impact protein fractionation”
t0“Cucumber (Cucumis sativus)”
e2“at 400 mg/kg, CeO2 and ZnO NPs increased starch content”
e3“none of the ZnO NP concentrations affected sugars”
Claim · model-written summary
CeO2 nanoparticles at 400 mg/kg increased globulin.
- Taxon
- Cucumis sativusCucumis sativust0e2e3
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“CeO2 NPs at 400 mg/kg increased globulin and decreased glutelin.”
t0“Cucumber (Cucumis sativus)”
e2“at 400 mg/kg, CeO2 and ZnO NPs increased starch content”
e3“none of the ZnO NP concentrations affected sugars”
Claim · model-written summary
CeO2 nanoparticles at 400 mg/kg decreased glutelin.
- Taxon
- Cucumis sativusCucumis sativust0e2e3
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“CeO2 NPs at 400 mg/kg increased globulin and decreased glutelin.”
t0“Cucumber (Cucumis sativus)”
e2“at 400 mg/kg, CeO2 and ZnO NPs increased starch content”
e3“none of the ZnO NP concentrations affected sugars”
Claim · model-written summary
CeO2 nanoparticles did not affect flavonoid content.
- Taxon
- Cucumis sativusCucumis sativust0e2e3
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Both CeO2 and ZnO NPs had no impact on flavonoid content”
t0“Cucumber (Cucumis sativus)”
e2“at 400 mg/kg, CeO2 and ZnO NPs increased starch content”
e3“none of the ZnO NP concentrations affected sugars”
Claim · model-written summary
ZnO nanoparticles did not affect flavonoid content.
- Taxon
- Cucumis sativusCucumis sativust0e2e3
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Both CeO2 and ZnO NPs had no impact on flavonoid content”
t0“Cucumber (Cucumis sativus)”
e2“at 400 mg/kg, CeO2 and ZnO NPs increased starch content”
e3“none of the ZnO NP concentrations affected sugars”
Claim · model-written summary
CeO2 nanoparticles at 800 mg/kg significantly reduced phenolics.
- Taxon
- Cucumis sativusCucumis sativust0e2e3
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“CeO2 NPs at 800 mg/kg significantly reduced phenolic content.”
t0“Cucumber (Cucumis sativus)”
e2“at 400 mg/kg, CeO2 and ZnO NPs increased starch content”
e3“none of the ZnO NP concentrations affected sugars”
Claim · model-written summary
None of the nanoparticle treatments reduced fruit macronutrients.
- Taxon
- Cucumis sativusCucumis sativust0e2e3
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“none of the treatments reduced macronutrients in fruit.”
t0“Cucumber (Cucumis sativus)”
e2“at 400 mg/kg, CeO2 and ZnO NPs increased starch content”
e3“none of the ZnO NP concentrations affected sugars”
Claim · model-written summary
All nanoparticle treatments reduced fruit Mo concentration.
- Taxon
- Cucumis sativusCucumis sativust0e2e3
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“all treatments reduced Mo concentration”
t0“Cucumber (Cucumis sativus)”
e2“at 400 mg/kg, CeO2 and ZnO NPs increased starch content”
e3“none of the ZnO NP concentrations affected sugars”
Claim · model-written summary
ZnO nanoparticles at 400 mg/kg reduced fruit Cu accumulation.
- Taxon
- Cucumis sativusCucumis sativust0e2e3
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“at 400 mg/kg, ZnO NPs reduced Cu accumulation.”
t0“Cucumber (Cucumis sativus)”
e2“at 400 mg/kg, CeO2 and ZnO NPs increased starch content”
e3“none of the ZnO NP concentrations affected sugars”
Claim · model-written summary
Cu, Mn and Zn accumulated mainly in cucumber seeds.
- Taxon
- Cucumis sativusCucumis sativust0e2e3
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Cu, Mn, and Zn were mainly accumulated in cucumber seeds.”
t0“Cucumber (Cucumis sativus)”
e2“at 400 mg/kg, CeO2 and ZnO NPs increased starch content”
e3“none of the ZnO NP concentrations affected sugars”
The same questions in other papers
zinc oxide · nutrient: content · Cucumis sativus (cucumber)Positive and negative results
1 in the opposite direction
- positive
zinc oxide · quality: phytochemicals · Cucumis sativus (cucumber)Positive and negative results
1 in the opposite direction
- positive
nanoparticle · quality: phytochemicals · Cucumis sativus (cucumber)Positive and negative results
1 paper in the same direction as this paper · 6 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
4 papers more in this group
See all 8 papers →nanoparticle · nutrient: content · Cucumis sativus (cucumber)Positive and negative results
1 paper in the same direction as this paper · 14 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
12 papers more in this group
See all 16 papers →nanoparticle · quality: sugar starch · Cucumis sativus (cucumber)Results agree
2 papers in the same direction as this paper
- positive
- positive
Claims are grouped by organism, treatment and what was measured or targeted. A paper counts as positive when any of its claims in the group is positive.