| Literature DB >> 31426406 |
Ângelo Luís1,2, Fernanda Domingues1,3, Ana Ramos4,5.
Abstract
Hydrophobic zein-based functional films incorporating licorice essential oil were successfully developed as new alternative materials for food packaging. The lotus-leaf negative template was obtained using polydimethylsiloxane (PDMS). The complex surface patterns of the lotus leaves were transferred onto the surface of the zein-based films with high fidelity (positive replica), which validates the proposed proof-of-concept. The films were prepared by casting method and fully characterized by Scanning Electron Microscopy (SEM), Fourier-transform infrared spectroscopy (FTIR) and Differential Scanning Calorimetry (DSC). The grammage, thickness, contact angle, mechanical, optical and barrier properties of the films were measured, together with the evaluation of their biodegradability, antioxidant and antibacterial activities against common foodborne pathogens (Enterococcus faecalis and Listeria monocytogenes). The zein-based films with the incorporation of licorice essential oil presented the typical rugosities of the lotus leaf making the surfaces very hydrophobic (water contact angle of 112.50°). In addition to having antioxidant and antibacterial properties, the films also shown to be biodegradable, making them a strong alternative to the traditional plastics used in food packaging.Entities:
Keywords: antibacterial activity; antioxidant properties; food packaging; foodborne pathogens; licorice essential oil; lotus-effect; water contact angle
Year: 2019 PMID: 31426406 PMCID: PMC6723050 DOI: 10.3390/microorganisms7080267
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Microorganisms ISSN: 2076-2607
Figure 1Flowchart for negative template fabrication and films preparation (a). SEM images of lotus leaf surface (b), PDMS-negative template (c), and zein film-positive replica (d). (Magnification: 500×).
Figure 2FTIR spectra of the films: control film (without EO) (a), film with EO (b), and films after 10 days of soil burial (c).
Figure 3DSC curves of the films: control film (without EO) (a), and film with EO (b).
Grammage, thickness, mechanical and optical properties of the films.
| Properties | Films | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Polystyrene Petri Dishes | Lotus Negative Template | ||||
| Without EO a | With EO b | Without EO c | With EO d | ||
| Grammage (g/m2) | 107.30 ± 5.33 | 145.10 ± 18.64 | 128.55 ± 3.35 | 167.21 ± 1.41 | 0.088 ab |
| Thickness (µm) | 118.70 ± 10.70 | 119.33 ± 13.92 | 156.67 ± 29.66 | 166.67 ± 10.99 | 0.914 ab |
| Tensile strength (MPa) | 14.20 ± 2.08 | 9.60 ± 0.55 | 6.82 ± 0.57 | 5.31 ± 0.62 | 0.054 ab |
| Elongation (%) | 2.51 ± 0.36 | 2.44 ± 0.36 | 3.13 ± 0.22 | 2.21 ± 0.38 | 0.823 ab |
| Elastic modulus (MPa) | 927.12 ± 110.02 | 353.21 ± 20.21 | 172.49 ± 25.49 | 257.97 ± 31.80 | 0.111 ab |
| Transparency (%) | 94.89 ± 0.45 | 63.78 ± 2.56 | 82.38 ± 0.98 | 69.92 ± 1.56 | 0.050 ab |
| L* | 25.99 ± 0.47 | 62.35 ± 1.65 | 46.67 ± 1.41 | 56.85 ± 0.44 | |
| a* | −1.43 ± 0.07 | 0.04 ± 0.39 | 0.39 ± 0.05 | 2.69 ± 1.01 | 0.158 ab |
| b* | 10.74 ± 1.95 | 37.70 ± 1.51 | 26.49 ± 1.70 | 42.73 ± 2.31 | |
(Results expressed as mean ± SD) a, b, c and d correspond to each type of film; Significant p-values are highlighted in bold.
Barrier properties of the films: water vapor permeability.
| Properties | Films | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Polystyrene Petri Dishes | Lotus Negative Template | ||||
| Without EO a | With EO b | Without EO c | With EO d | ||
| WVTR (g/(m2.day)) | 31.53 ± 3.38 | 30.33 ± 3.04 | 27.23 ± 0.68 | 27.23 ± 4.73 | 0.672 ab |
| WVP (g/(Pa.day.m)) | 2.74 ± 0.167 | 2.74 ± 0.274 | 3.58 ± 0.049 | 4.46 ± 0.178 | 1.000 ab |
(Results expressed as mean ± SD) a, b, c and d correspond to each type of film; Significant p-values are highlighted in bold.
Contact angle, water solubility and weight loss of the films.
| Properties | Films | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Polystyrene Petri Dishes | Lotus Negative Template | ||||||||
| Without EO A | With EO B | Without EO C | With EO D | ||||||
| Lower Side a | Upper Side | Lower Side b | Upper Side | Lower Side | Upper Side d | Lower Side | Upper Side f | ||
| Contact angle (°) | 48.27 ± 3.76 | 31.49 ± 1.05 | 71.80 ± 8.60 | 69.92 ± 3.02 | 81.95 ± 8.74 | 65.15 ± 3.11 | 112.50 ± 3.48 | 58.04 ± 5.71 |
|
| Water solubility (%) | 20.33 ± 1.45 | 23.41 ± 2.18 | 22.38 ± 0.73 | 22.38 ± 1.57 | 0.118 AB | ||||
| Weight loss (%) | 61.97 ± 3.16 | 56.61 ± 1.18 | 63.72 ± 2.82 | 47.66 ± 3.31 | 0.181 AB | ||||
(Results expressed as mean ± SD) a, b, c, d, e and f correspond to each type of film (and side); A, B, C and D correspond to the films with or without the EO; Significant p-values are highlighted in bold.
Figure 4Antioxidant activity of the films measured by DPPH scavenging assay.
Antioxidant activity (β-carotene bleaching assay) and diameters of inhibition zones obtained with the films.
|
|
|
| |||
|
|
| ||||
|
|
|
|
| ||
| % Inhibition | 3.45 ± 0.26 | 29.00 ± 1.67 | 5.91 ± 0.64 | 22.36 ± 1.29 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 6.45 ± 0.24 | 7.68 ± 0.39 | 6.52 ± 0.36 | 7.74 ± 0.40 | ||
| 6.58 ± 0.33 | 8.25 ± 0.42 | 6.64 ± 0.35 | 8.46 ± 0.39 | ||
(Results expressed as mean ± SD) a, b, c and d correspond to each type of film; Significant p-values are highlighted in bold.
Figure 5Biodegradability: soil burial degradation test of the films. Film without EO — polystyrene Petri dishes (1), film without EO — lotus negative template (2), film with EO —polystyrene Petri dishes (3), and film with EO —lotus negative template (4); initial films at 0 days (a), and films after soil burial degradation test (10 days) (b).