Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34372125›Full record

ArticlePolymers2021

Functional Nanocellulose, Alginate and Chitosan Nanocomposites Designed as Active Film Packaging Materials.

Gregor Lavrič, Ana Oberlintner, Inese Filipova, Uroš Novak, Blaž Likozar, Urška Vrabič-Brodnjak

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Polymers, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed
6.1field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

23 citing papers in PubMed, 117 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Nanocellulose-Based Films for Surface Protection of Wooden Artefacts.International journal of molecular sciences · 2024
    Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Gregor LavričPulp and Paper Institute, Bogišićeva Ulica 8, 1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia.ORCID 0000-0001-8094-9395
Ana OberlintnerNational Institute of Chemistry, Hajdrihova 19, 1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia.ORCID 0000-0001-9437-8204
Inese FilipovaLatvian State Institute of Wood Chemistry, Dzerbenes Street 27, LV-1006 Riga, Latvia.ORCID 0000-0001-6312-8990
Uroš NovakNational Institute of Chemistry, Hajdrihova 19, 1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia.
Blaž LikozarNational Institute of Chemistry, Hajdrihova 19, 1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia.ORCID 0000-0001-7226-4302
Urška Vrabič-BrodnjakDepartment of Textiles, Graphic Arts and Design, Faculty of Natural Sciences and Engineering, University of Ljubljana, Snežniška 5, 1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia.ORCID 0000-0003-0865-8619
National Institute of Chemistry · SIJožef Stefan International Postgraduate School · SILatvian State Institute of Wood Chemistry · LVUniversity of Ljubljana · SI

Funding

European Regional Development Fund, Contract No. 1.1.1.2/VIAA/1/16/211 (Agreement No. 1.1.1.2/16/I/001) "Study of novel method for nanocellulose isolation from biomass and its residues" 1.1.1.2/VIAA/1/16/211 (Agreement No. 1.1.1.2/16/I/001)This research was also funded by the PhD research grant (Ana Oberlintner) and Slovenian Research Agency (Program P2-0152). Program P2-0152
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The aim of the study was to characterize and compare films made of cellulose nanocrystals (CNC), nano-fibrils (CNF), and bacterial nanocellulose (BNC) in combination with chitosan and alginate in terms of applicability for potential food packaging applications. In total, 25 different formulations were made and evaluated, and seven biopolymer films with the best mechanical performance (tensile strength, strain)-alginate, alginate with 5% CNC, chitosan, chitosan with 3% CNC, BNC with and without glycerol, and CNF with glycerol-were selected and investigated regarding morphology (SEM), density, contact angle, surface energy, water absorption, and oxygen and water barrier properties. Studies revealed that polysaccharide-based films with added CNC are the most suitable for packaging purposes, and better dispersing of nanocellulose in chitosan than in alginate was observed. Results showed an increase in hydrophobicity (increase of contact angle and reduced moisture absorption) of chitosan and alginate films with the addition of CNC, and chitosan with 3% CNC had the highest contact angle, 108 ± 2, and 15% lower moisture absorption compared to pure chitosan. Overall, the ability of nanocellulose additives to preserve the structure and function of chitosan and alginate materials in a humid environment was convincingly demonstrated. Barrier properties were improved by combining the biopolymers, and water vapor transmission rate (WVTR) was reduced by 15-45% and oxygen permeability (OTR) up to 45% by adding nanocellulose compared to single biopolymer formulations. It was concluded that with a good oxygen barrier, a water barrier that is comparable to PLA, and good mechanical properties, biopolymer films would be a good alternative to conventional plastic packaging used for ready-to-eat foods with short storage time.

Indexed as

alginatebio-based biopolymer composites for foodbiomass-derived biomaterial nanocompositescarbohydratechitosanfilm packaging materialfunctional active designnanocelluloseoxygen/air/water barrier propertiespolysaccharide

Identifiers

PMID34372125
PMCPMC8348297
OpenAlexW3189336650

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.