| Literature DB >> 31266201 |
Tjaša Kraševac Glaser1, Olivija Plohl2, Alenka Vesel3, Urban Ajdnik2, Nataša Poklar Ulrih4, Maša Knez Hrnčič5, Urban Bren5, Lidija Fras Zemljič6.
Abstract
The present paper reports a novel method to improve the properties of polyethylene (PE) and polypropylene (PP) polymer foils suitable for applications in food packaging. It relates to the adsorption of chitosan-colloidal systems onto untreated and oxygen plasma-treated foil surfaces. It is hypothesized that the first coated layer of chitosan macromolecular solution enables excellent antibacterial properties, while the second (uppermost) layer contains a network of polyphenol resveratrol, embedded into chitosan nanoparticles, which enables antioxidant and antimicrobial properties simultaneously. X-ray photon spectroscopy (XPS) and infrared spectroscopy (FTIR) showed successful binding of both coatings onto foils as confirmed by gravimetric method. In addition, both attached layers (chitosan macromolecular solution and dispersion of chitosan nanoparticles with incorporated resveratrol) onto foils reduced oxygen permeability and wetting contact angle of foils; the latter indicates good anti-fog foil properties. Reduction of both oxygen permeability and wetting contact angle is more pronounced when foils are previously activated by O2 plasma. Moreover, oxygen plasma treatment improves stability and adhesion of chitosan structured adsorbates onto PP and PE foils. Foils also exhibit over 90% reduction of Staphylococcus aureus and over 77% reduction of Escherichia coli as compared to untreated foils and increase antioxidant activity for over a factor of 10. The present method may be useful in different packaging applications such as food (meat, vegetables, dairy, and bakery products) and pharmaceutical packaging, where such properties of foils are desired.Entities:
Keywords: O2 plasma; PE/PP functionalization; active packaging; chitosan-resveratrol; nanoparticles
Year: 2019 PMID: 31266201 PMCID: PMC6651377 DOI: 10.3390/ma12132118
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Materials (Basel) ISSN: 1996-1944 Impact factor: 3.623
Samples descriptions.
| Sample Notation | Description of Sample |
|---|---|
| A1 | polyethylene (PE) foil |
| A2 | polypropylene (PP) foil |
| A3 | PE foil treated with O2 plasma |
| A4 | PP foil treated with O2 plasma |
| B1 | chitosan powder (CS) |
| B2 | 2% (w/v) chitosan (CS) |
| B3 | chitosan nanoparticles (CSNPs) dispersion |
| C1 | resveratrol powder (RES) |
| C2 | Chitosan–resveratrol nano dispersion (CSNPs RES) |
| D1 | untreated PE foil, applicate with CS-1. layer and CSNPs RES-2. layer |
| D2 | untreated PP foil, applicate with CS-1. layer and CSNPs RES-2. layer |
| E1 | PE foil treated with O2 plasma, applicate with CS-1. layer and CSNPs RES-2. layer |
| E2 | PP foil treated with O2 plasma, applicate with CS-1. layer and CSNPs RES-2. layer |
Particle size, polydispersity index (PDI) and zeta potential of chitosan nanoparticles (CSNPs) and CSNPs resveratrol (RES).
| Sample | Z-Average (nm) by Intensity | PDI | ZP (mV) | pH |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CSNPs | 359 ± 40 | 0.87 ± 0.09 | 36 ± 5 | 4.0 |
| CSNPs RES |
| 0.58 ± 0.18 | 48 ± 10 | 4.0 |
Figure 1Particle size, PDI, and zeta potential of CSNPs and CSNPs RES.
Minimal inhibitory concentration (MIC) (mg/mL) of resveratrol determined by microdilution method.
| Bacteria | MIC (mg/mL) |
|---|---|
|
| 5.01 |
|
| 0.16 |
Minimal inhibitory concentrations of chitosan solutions (CS) and dispersion of chitosan nanoparticles (CSNPs).
| Bacteria | MIC (mg/mL) of CS | MIC (mg/mL) of CSNPs |
|---|---|---|
|
| 0.0053 ± 0.0011 | 0.0092 ± 0.0029 |
|
| 0.0039 ± 0.0001 | 0.0078 ± 0.0002 |
Percentage (%) of adsorption of chitosan macromolecular solution and CSNPs RES dispersion onto the foil.
| Sample | Mass of Dry Reference Foil [g/cm2] | Mass of Dry Functionalised Sample [g/cm2] | Δ | Adsorption [%] |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| D1 | 46.36 ± 0.03 | 46.70 ± 0.01 | 0.34 ± 0.02 | 0.73 |
| D2 | 23.20 ± 0.06 | 23.52 ± 0.08 | 0.32 ± 0.07 | 1.36 |
| E1 | 46.32 ± 0.02 | 46.49 ± 0.02 | 0.17 ± 0.02 | 0.36 |
| E2 | 23.23 ± 0.01 | 23.50 ± 0.04 | 0.27 ± 0.02 | 1.18 |
Figure 2FTIR spectra of reference polyethylene (PE) (A1), chitosan (B1), resveratrol (C1), and different treated PE foils with application (D1 and E1) (a); comparison of the FTIR spectra between D1 and E1 (by normalizing) (b).
Figure 3FTIR spectra of reference polypropylene (PP) (A2), chitosan (B1), resveratrol (C1), and different treated PP foils with application (D2 and E2) (a); comparison of the FTIR spectra between D2 and E2 (by normalizing) (b).
Surface chemical composition (at.%) of the reference foils and plasma-treated foils with the two-layer coating (at.%). Statistical significance is defined as * p < 0.05 compared to control sample (ANOVA test).
| Untreated Foils | O2 Treated Foils | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sample | C | N | O | Sample | C | N | O |
| A1 | 98.9 ± 0.6 | - | 1.1 ± 0.3 | A3 |
| - |
|
| A2 | 98.7 ± 0.3 | - | 1.3 ± 0.1 | A4 |
| - |
|
| D1 |
| 3.3 ± 0.8 |
| E1 | 60.6 ± 0.0 | 6.7 ± 0.2 | 31.7 ± 0.3 |
| D2 |
| 2.0 ± 0.1 |
| E2 | 59.5 ± 0.1 | 6.7 ± 0.0 | 32.7 ± 0.5 |
Figure 4High-resolution carbon C1s spectrum of plasma-treated (a) PE and (b) PP samples.
The oxygen permeability between the reference foils and the foils with the application. Statistical significance is defined as * p < 0.05 compared to control sample (ANOVA test).
| Sample | OTR (cm3/m2d) |
|---|---|
| A1 | 3226 ± 62 |
| A2 | 1078 ± 36 |
| D1 | 2417 ± 104 |
| D2 | 968 ± 19 |
| E1 |
|
| E2 |
|
Figure 5CSA of samples.
Values of static contact angle (SCA) measurements. Statistical significance is defined as * p < 0.05 compared to control sample (ANOVA) test).
| Sample | Average Angle (α/°) | Difference (%) |
|---|---|---|
| A1 | 108.2 ± 1.2 | / |
| A2 | 109.3 ± 0.7 | / |
| A3 |
| 72.6 |
| A4 |
| 66.1 |
| D1 |
| 14.0 |
| D2 |
| 22.4 |
| E1 |
| 60.8 |
| E2 |
| 58.6 |
Figure 6SEM micrographs of functionalized surface of PE and PP with resveratrol-loaded chitosan- sodium tripolyphosphate (TPP) nano dispersion.
Desorption of chitosan amino group per gram of foil.
| Desorption of Chitosan | Sample | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| D1 | D2 | E1 | E2 | |
| [mmol/kg] | 18.90 ± 2.84 | 11.80 ± 1.30 | 1.92 ± 0.42 | 0.51 ± 0.31 |
Figure 7Polyelectrolyte titration curve on the example of sample E1 after 24 h.
Antimicrobial efficacy of gram-positive (Staphylococcus aureus) and gram-negative bacteria (Escherichia coli). Statistical significance is defined as * p < 0.05 compared to control sample (ANOVA test).
| Bacteria |
|
| ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sample | Number of Cells | Antimicrobial Efficacy | Number of Cells | Antimicrobial Efficacy |
| (log cfu/cm²) | (%) | (log cfu/cm²) | (%) | |
| A1 | 4.58 ± 0.06 | - | 4.58 ± 0.06 | - |
| A2 | 5.10 ± 0.05 | - | 5.10 ± 0.05 | - |
| D1 | 1.35 ± 0.30 | 72.91 ± 8.26 | 3.25 ± 0.14 | 37.73 ± 2.77 |
| D2 | 3.57 ± 0.33 | 22.03 ± 7.28 | 3.89 ± 0.36 | 25.32 ± 6.87 |
| E1 |
| 93.54 ± 3.95 |
| 77.55 ± 2.57 |
| E2 |
| 91.21 ± 2.22 |
| 79.43 ± 5.86 |
Figure 8Graphical representation of anti-oxidative activity of CS, CSNPs RES-coated PE, and PP foils after the same time interval.