James Kegere1, Amged Ouf1, Rania Siam1, Wael Mamdouh1. 1. Department of Chemistry, School of Sciences and Engineering (SSE) and Department of Biology and Biotechnology Graduate Program, School of Sciences and Engineering (SSE), The American University in Cairo (AUC), AUC Avenue, P.O. Box 74, New Cairo 11835, Egypt.
Abstract
Due to the current challenges faced by the increasing rate of drug-resistant bacteria, attention is gradually shifting from synthetic antimicrobial chemical compounds to natural products that are ecofriendly with a wide spectrum of properties. The aim of this research was to successfully fabricate electrospun nanofibers from poly(vinyl alcohol) (PVA), PVA blended with Bidens pilosa and chitosan composite blends and investigate their potential antibacterial activities against Escherichia coli and Staphylococcus aureus. Fabrication of nanofibers was performed by the electrospinning technique, which applies high voltage on the polymer, forcing it to spin off as a jet onto a plate collector. Characterization of the nanofibers was successfully performed by scanning electron microscopy and Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy. Antibacterial assessment was carried out by colony forming unit enumeration. The results obtained revealed a 12% increase in growth inhibition of bacteria in composite nanofibers as compared with their parental forms, which were >91 and 79%, respectively. Chitosan nanofibers have been extensively researched, and their antibacterial properties have been studied. However B. pilosa antibacterial properties in a nanofiber form have not been previously reported. These composite nanofibers open new avenues toward using natural materials as potent antibacterial agents.
Due to the current challenges faced by the increasing rate of drug-resistant bacteria, attention is gradually shifting from synthetic antimicrobial chemical compounds to natural products that are ecofriendly with a wide spectrum of properties. The aim of this research was to successfully fabricate electrospun nanofibers from poly(vinyl alcohol) (PVA), PVA blended with Bidens pilosa and chitosan composite blends and investigate their potential antibacterial activities against Escherichia coli and Staphylococcus aureus. Fabrication of nanofibers was performed by the electrospinning technique, which applies high voltage on the polymer, forcing it to spin off as a jet onto a plate collector. Characterization of the nanofibers was successfully performed by scanning electron microscopy and Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy. Antibacterial assessment was carried out by colony forming unit enumeration. The results obtained revealed a 12% increase in growth inhibition of bacteria in composite nanofibers as compared with their parental forms, which were >91 and 79%, respectively. Chitosan nanofibers have been extensively researched, and their antibacterial properties have been studied. However B. pilosa antibacterial properties in a nanofiber form have not been previously reported. These composite nanofibers open new avenues toward using natural materials as potent antibacterial agents.
Despite
the modern technological advancements in biomedical research,
disease outbreaks caused by bacterial infections continue to claim
lives and cause uncertainty to humanity.[1,2] The rate of
microbial resistance is rising dangerously around the world and endangering
man, plants, and animals in equal measure. This threat has complicated
the development of new conventional chemical compounds, resulting
in the decline in research and development for new antibiotics.[2,3] Bacterial infection is a common occurrence in the world and especially
in remote areas where modern medicare is hard to get.[4] The recent advances in nanotechnology have provided a modicum
of hope to cope with the fears caused by looming bacterial outbreaks.[5] Materials at the nanoscale exhibit properties
that are not seen or believed to exist in the bulk scale of the same
materials.[6] Nanotechnology and nanomaterials
have been in existence for long time, for example silver and silver
nanoparticles were some of the first antimicrobial materials used
extensively in the ancient world.[6,7] Until today,
silver remains a potent antimicrobial agent that is commonly added
to cosmetics and shampoos to prevent infections.[8] Although the newly discovered nanomaterials may have individual
antibacterial properties, focus is now being switched to composite,
biodegradable materials with synergistic effect against microbial
infections.[9] Development of nanocomposites
has been inspired by the challenges and limitations encountered when
using microcomposites and monolithic materials.[8] Although they pose challenges in preparation due to the
stoichiometric limitations in the nanophase, nanocomposites generally
offer superior and user-friendly properties when compared with the
microcomposites and monoliths.[4] Nanocomposite
materials are reputed to be materials of the 21st century owing to
uniqueness in property combinations, which are rarely found in conventional
materials. Development of nanofibers and their applications in various
fields have attracted tremendous attention from the scientific community
in the last decade.[10,11] This is due to the unique novel
properties that come with reduction in size toward the nanoscale,
and for the case of fibers, it comes with myriad benefits in both
environment and biomedical fields.[12] Nanofibers
have a large surface-area–volume ratio, an easily biofunctionalized
surface, and superior mechanical properties.[13] These properties have made nanofibers versatile in applications
ranging from engineering to medical, environmental, and catalysis
areas.[14]Electrospinning is a technique
in which materials in a solution
form are subjected to high-voltage power supply to produce fibers
that are in the micro and nano size range. For the electrospinning
process to occur, the following parameters have to be considered and
carefully controlled: polymer solution, high voltage power supply,
and the distance from the spinneret to the collector plate. The mechanism
that leads to the formation of fibers herein is the stretching of
the solution as it attempts to drop off the needle tip. This stretching
is forced by the electrostatic forces that act on the polymer solution
as a result of a repulsion between the polymer molecules and changes
in the current. The solution is forced to pass through a narrow orifice
electrified by the applied voltage in the range between 10 and 30
kV, which charges the solution and leads to the formation of a tailor
cone, which then provides a platform for the jet of the material to
whip down violently toward the collector plate.The goal of
this project was to synthesize poly(vinyl alcohol)
(PVA)/Bidens pilosa (BP)/chitosan (CS)
composite nanofibers and investigate the effect of solution electrospinning
parameters on the fabrication of these nanocomposites and their antibacterial
properties.PVA is a well-known polymer because of its biocompatibility
and
biodegradability, and these novel qualities have made it gain enormous
attention in biomedical research for multiple applications ranging
from drug delivery to antibiotic development and scaffolds for tissue
engineering applications.[15] Chitosan on
the other hand is also known to have strong antibacterial activity
against both Gram-positive and Gram-negative bacteria, viruses, and
fungi.[16] It has attracted great attention
over the last 2 decades in biomedical applications given the novelty
chitosan has as pertains to its properties.[16] The mechanism of chitosan antibacterial action has been extensively
studied, and previous research has linked the polycationic nature
of the amine groups, in solution, to lowering the pH below 6.5.[17] The cations in the biopolymer are therefore
believed to interact with the negative charges on the cell membrane
of microorganisms, leading to the hydrolysis of the peptidoglycan
and thus affecting the physiological processes of the cell.[18]B. pilosa (BP) is a herbaceous plant
commonly referred to as Spanish needle or black jack, originated in
South America, and widely distributed around the world being used
as a food and medicine in many communities in Africa, America, Asia,
and Oceania.[19]BP is a rich reservoir
of phytochemicals, which give it unique
properties useful in antimicrobial, antiseptic, anti-inflammatory,
antioxidant, anticancer, and nutritional applications. Research conducted
to profile the phytochemicals found in BP revealed that it contained
about 201 compounds, of which 34.8% are aliphatic compounds, 29.8%
terpenoids, 9.45% phenylpropanoids, 6.4%, aromatics, 3.9% porphyrins,
and 2.9% other compounds.[19] Each part of
the world has adopted BP for different functions, for example, in
Africa, it is used for the treatment of wounds, diarrhea, influenza,
headache, stomachache, etc.[19] In Cuba,
the decoction (boiled extract) of BP is used as a juice as well as
an anti-inflammatory agent and also in the treatment of diabetes and
asthma. It is also used as a medicine for conjunctivitis, otitis,
colic, and snakebites in China. In Central America, BP is important
in the treatment of eye infections and is used as a diuretic and hypotensive
agent. In Uganda, BP has been explored in the treatment of malaria,
wounds, nasal bleeds, and stomach ulcers. The list of applications
in the biomedical field is extensive.[19] Thus, in this work, the combination of PVA, chitosan, and BP extract,
particularly in the nanofiber form, is expected to have a synergistic
antimicrobial effect against different bacterial strains.
Results and Discussion
Solubility and Miscibility
of the Composites
In preparing PVA (polyvinyl alcohol):EXT
(crude extract B. pilosa) and PVA:DBP
(distilled B. pilosa) in situ and ex
situ to be electrospun,
care was taken to ensure that solution parameters were optimized to
produce smooth nanofibers. PVA:DBP was completely solubilized, and
formation of nanofibers was a smooth process. For PVA:EXT, about 90%
of the extract was solubilized, while the undissolved/sediment portion
accounted for 10%. Energy-dispersive X-ray spectroscopy (EDX) analysis
of the sediment and solution of PVA:EXT revealed changes in the composition
of carbon-based materials, oxygen groups, and minerals. Sediments
contained slightly higher percentage of carbon and oxygen, meaning
that derivatives of these elements were evenly distributed, as shown
in Figure a. Generally
the amount of minerals was more in the soluble portion than in the
sediment as most of them were water-soluble. On the other hand, both
distilled and crude extracts contained similar percentages of oxygen
although they differed in the quantity of carbon and minerals, as
can be seen in Figure b.
Figure 1
EDX analysis of elements present in (a) sediment and (b) dissolved
PVA:EXT.
EDX analysis of elements present in (a) sediment and (b) dissolved
PVA:EXT.
Effect
of Working Parameters on the Properties
of the Formed Nanofibers
Voltage was an important parameter
for the electrospinning process and influenced to a great extent the
morphological properties of the formed nanofibers. To be able to spin
the solution in the syringe to obtain fibers, an optimum amount of
the applied voltage is required to eject and sequester the liquid
material into fibers, which are then collected on the collector plate.
To study the effect of the applied voltage on the nanofiber characteristics,
a PVA:EXT (in situ) solution of 8% concentration was prepared and
a range of spinning voltages were used ranging from 16 to 21 kV, as
shown in Figure a–f.
At a voltage of 16 kV, nanofibers of PVA:EXT were smooth with no beads,
and this voltage was ideal for fiber formation in all categories of
material combinations. The diameter of the nanofibers in both PVA:EXT
ranged between 35 and 80 nm, and there was a narrow diameter distribution,
as shown in Figure a,b. As the voltage was increased to 18 kV, these properties changed,
whereas incidences of bead formation were observed and the formed
nanofibers generally appeared with fiber diameter inconsistency as
well as increase in the average fiber diameter. The range of nanofiber
diameter in both cases at 18 kV was found to be between 14 and 179
nm, which was nearly double the size of the fibers obtained at voltage
16 kV, as shown in Figure c,d. Moreover, as the voltage was increased further to 21
kV (as shown in Figure e), the fiber diameter was increased and there was a problem of wider
diameter distribution (Figure f) as well as incidences of electric discharge. These results
were consistent with the findings of Zhao et al. on the morphology
of electrospun polyacrylamide nanofibers. Diameters of nanofibers
for all parameters were analyzed using Image J analysis software and
plotted by using Microsoft Origin lab software version 8.5.
Figure 2
Scanning electron
microscopy (SEM) images of 8% PVA:EXT nanofibers
with the effect of voltages of (a) 16 kV, (c) 18 kV, and (e) 21 kV;
solution flow rate of 1 mL/h, and the tip-to-collector distance of
12 cm. Their corresponding fiber diameter distribution histograms
are shown in (b), (d), and (f).
Scanning electron
microscopy (SEM) images of 8% PVA:EXT nanofibers
with the effect of voltages of (a) 16 kV, (c) 18 kV, and (e) 21 kV;
solution flow rate of 1 mL/h, and the tip-to-collector distance of
12 cm. Their corresponding fiber diameter distribution histograms
are shown in (b), (d), and (f).In addition, the solution flow rate had a remarkable impact
on
the properties of the formed nanofibers, especially bead formation
control. Composites were prepared and subjected to a constant voltage
of 16 kV and the tip-to-collector distance of 12 cm while adjusting
the solution flow rate from 0.8 to 1.2 mL/h. SEM images in Figure reveal the extent
of the impact of solution flow rate on the formed nanofibers. When
the solution flow rate was reduced to 0.8 mL/h, there was a shift
in the fiber inconsistence and bead formation in both cases. At a
solution flow rate of 1 mL/h, fiber formation was uninterrupted and
the fibers were smooth with negligible levels of dropping (as shown
in Figure a). On the
other hand, when the solution flow rate was raised to 1.2 mL/h, there
were challenges similar to those associated with low solution flow
rate, as shown in Figure e.
Figure 3
SEM images of PVA:EXT nanofibers with the effect of the solution
flow rates of (a) 0.8 mL/h, (c) 1 mL/h, and (e) 1.2 mL/h at 16 kV
and a tip-to-collector distance of 12 cm. Their corresponding fiber
diameter distribution histograms are shown in (b), (d), and (f).
SEM images of PVA:EXT nanofibers with the effect of the solution
flow rates of (a) 0.8 mL/h, (c) 1 mL/h, and (e) 1.2 mL/h at 16 kV
and a tip-to-collector distance of 12 cm. Their corresponding fiber
diameter distribution histograms are shown in (b), (d), and (f).Moreover, the concentration of
the solution is one of the key factors,
which determines the morphology of fibers that can be obtained by
electrospinning. The influence of the PVA:EXT concentration on nanofiber
formation is shown in the SEM images in Figure a,c,e,g. It was observed that the formation
of smooth beadless fibers increases on increasing the concentration
of the solution. At a concentration of 6% of PVA:EXT, fibers break
along with beads, which however improved to smooth beadless fibers
upon increasing the concentration to 8%. Moreover, as the concentration
increased to 10% (SEM image in Figure e), fiber entanglement was observed, and at the concentration
of 12%, ribbonlike structures were formed (SEM image in Figure g). All of these changes equally
affected the fiber diameters, which increased as a result from 34
nm for 6% to over 100 nm for 12%, as shown in Figure b,d,f,h.
Figure 4
SEM images of PVA: EXT nanofibers electrospun
at solution flow
rate of 1mL/hour and applied voltage of 16kv from PVA solutions of
concentration (w/w): (a) 6%, (c) 8%, (e) 10%, and (g) 12%. Their corresponding
fiber diameter distribution histograms are shown in (b), (d), (f),
and (h).
SEM images of PVA: EXT nanofibers electrospun
at solution flow
rate of 1mL/hour and applied voltage of 16kv from PVA solutions of
concentration (w/w): (a) 6%, (c) 8%, (e) 10%, and (g) 12%. Their corresponding
fiber diameter distribution histograms are shown in (b), (d), (f),
and (h).The lower concentration of the
polymer was insufficient to maintain
a stable jet from the tailor cone to the plate collector, and the
breaks that resulted led to the formation of beads, as shown in the
SEM micrographs in Figure a for PVA:EXT. This low concentration is associated with the
increased surface tension, which cannot be overcome by the electrostatic
forces because of the low chain entanglement in the solution and high
solvent ratio in the solution. Yuan et al. attributed this scenario
to the lower viscosity and conductivity of the material at a lower
concentration as compared to higher concentrations. Thus, in the current
work, we have also observed that the viscosity of the solution increased
upon increasing the concentration of PVA:DBP/PVA:EXT as shown in the
Supporting Information (Figure S12).These morphological changes in the nanofibers are consistent with
the findings made by Xu et al. and Yuan et al. although with slight
differences, which arose due to current inconsistencies, molecular
weight differences in chitosan, and also disparities in syringe pump
efficiency.
Determination of Swelling
and Weight Loss
Percentages for Composite Nanofibers
The previously prepared
polymer composite nanofibers (non-cross-linked) were tested for their
swelling and weight loss percentages to determine their water absorption
capacity and degradability. For comparison, we have also used cross-linked
nanofibers made of the same components as the non-cross-linked ones. Figure shows the high swelling
capacity of all samples, with more emphasis on the cross-linked PVA:EXT:CS
showing the highest value, while there was a decrease in weight loss
percentage for all samples but was more obvious for PVA:EXT:CS, particularly
the cross-linked nanofibers.
Figure 5
Immersion test: (a) swelling capacity and (b)
weight loss of the
PVA-, EXT-, and CS-derived nanofibers.
Immersion test: (a) swelling capacity and (b)
weight loss of the
PVA-, EXT-, and CS-derived nanofibers.Based on these results, one can see that cross-linking of
the composite
nanofibers resulted into high swelling capacity and low weight loss.
This might possibly be due to the fact that cross-linking of nanofibers
might strengthen the interfiber bonding through either physical interaction
or chemical groups (hydrogen bonding) introduced by glutaraldehyde.
For swelling behavior, the presence of PVA, which is hydrophilic,
possibly increases the capacity of the fibers to take up water. Moreover,
introduction of amine groups from chitosan and glutaraldehyde enhances
the water uptake behavior of the nanofibers. These results were in
agreement with the findings of Kouchak et al., who studied water preservability
but using PVA-based nanofibers for tissue engineering.[20] The principle of weight loss and swelling ability
is very important for the nanofibers whose purposed application involves
absorption of molecules while maintaining their intergrity. It is
worth mentioning that the composite nanofibers (non-cross-linked)
were selected for the antibacterial studies.
There was little chemical difference between the
distilled and crude extracts of BP with hydroxyl and C–H group
peaks at 3406 and 3412 cm–1 and mild primary amine
and amide group peaks at 2900 and 1568 cm–1, respectively
(Figure ). CS and
PVA showed peaks of hydroxyl and primary amine groups (Figure A). Addition of chitosan to
PVA:EXT showed changes in the chemical properties by the notable shifts
in OH interactions and CN, NH, and C–X groups, as shown in Figure B.
Figure 6
FTIR charts for (A) (a)
crude extract of BP, (b) CS, and (c) PVA
and (B) (a) PVA, (b) PVA:EXT (in situ), and (c) PVA:EXT:CS (in situ).
FTIR charts for (A) (a)
crude extract of BP, (b) CS, and (c) PVA
and (B) (a) PVA, (b) PVA:EXT (in situ), and (c) PVA:EXT:CS (in situ).When PVA was mixed with the extract
and CS, there was a shift in
the peaks, especially in the OH stretching region at 3447 cm–1. There is also a shift in the NH region and intensification at the
region of O–H bending and C–O stretching, as shown in Figure B,a–c. It
was observed that significant chemical changes occurred when PVA was
dissolved in the crude extract of BP, as shown in Figure B. One such notable observation
was the change in the OH bonds. OH bonds were strong in the PVA alone;
however, when combined with the extract of BP, the intensity of OH
groups reduced. Cross-linking nanofibers resulted in changes in both
structural and chemical behaviors of the nanofibers. Physical SEM
image analysis revealed structural changes in the nanofiber morphology
and bonding between glutaraldehydehydrogen groups and the surface
groups on the fibers, as shown in Figure .
Figure 7
SEM images of (a) non-cross-linked PVA:EXT:CS,
(b) cross-linked
PVA:EXT:CS, (c) non-cross-linked PVA:EXT, and (d) cross-linked PVA:EXT.
SEM images of (a) non-cross-linked PVA:EXT:CS,
(b) cross-linked
PVA:EXT:CS, (c) non-cross-linked PVA:EXT, and (d) cross-linked PVA:EXT.FTIR spectroscopy analysis of
the cross-linked nanofibers reveals
significant chemical changes on interaction between glutaraldehyde
and the composites (PVA, PVA:EXT (in situ and ex situ), and PVA:DBP
(in situ and ex situ)) with a shift in peaks in the fingerprint region
as can be seen in Figure S8 in the Support
Information.
Antibacterial Testing
The antibacterial
effect of the composite non-cross-linked nanofibers was evaluated
using colony forming unit (CFU) enumeration. This method determines
the number of viable bacterial cells in a sample following incubation. Escherichia coli and Staphylococcus
aureus colonies were counted, and the standard deviation
of the triplicates was calculated.Although PVA is not known
to have antibacterial effect as a polymer, it showed limited effect
against E. coli and insignificant results
against S. aureus. On the other hand,
CS showed moderate activity against both E. coli and S. aureus (55.6 and 40%, respectively)
(Figure A).
Figure 8
Percentage
inhibition of both S. aureus and E. coli in the presence of PVA:EXT,
PVA, CS, PVA:EXT:CS (in situ), and pure extract of BP at the seventh
dilution.
Percentage
inhibition of both S. aureus and E. coli in the presence of PVA:EXT,
PVA, CS, PVA:EXT:CS (in situ), and pure extract of BP at the seventh
dilution.BP composite nanofibers (i.e.,
PVA:EXT and PVA:EXT:CS) formed both
in situ and ex situ (see the Supporting Information figure) were effective against both E. coli and S. aureus owing to the combined
effect of the crude extract of BP and CS. PVA:EXT inhibited 75.9 and
86% growth of E. coli and S. aureus, respectively, while PVA:EXT:CS inhibited
75.4 and 91% growth of S. aureus, as
shown in Figure .
Crude extract of BP composite nanofibers (PVA:EXT) exhibited a higher
antibacterial activity when compared with the distilled BP (see Supporting Information figures). The crude extract
of BP alone showed a remarkably higher activity; 64 and 51.7% against E. coli and S. aureus, respectively. Pure distillate of BP showed lower antibacterial
activity against E. coli (60%) and S. aureus (40%), respectively. Statistical analysis
of the antibacterial assay was performed using one-way analysis of
variance. Such statistical analysis revealed a significant enhancement
in the antibacterial activity using PVA:EXT and PVA:EXT:CS (P < 0.05).The minimum inhibition concentration
(MIC) for the PVA:EXT, PVA:EXT:CS,
and pure extract of BP was obtained to be 10 mg/mL, while the minimum
bactericidal concentration was between 10 and 20 mg/mL. The log reduction
is summarized in Table .
Table 1
In Situ Composite Nanofibers and Their
Log Reduction Values
log reduction value
sample (in
situ)
E. coli
S. aureus
PVA:EXT
1.05
0.99
PVA:EXT:CS
0.99
0.77
pure EXT
0.94
0.6
Similar
work carried out by Nguyen et al. using polylactic acid
and CS nanofibers revealed high and sustained antibacterial activity
of the nanofibers. The increase in the antibacterial effects at the
nanoscale is linked to the changes in the chemical properties that
occur with reduction in size, thus exposing chemically active groups
that interact with the cell membrane of bacteria.This nanocomposite
system and also the enhanced antibacterial activity
of the BP extract in the nanofiber delivery system have not been reported
in the literature. This is therefore an important discovery for biomedical
applications, especially for wound healing applications.
Conclusions
Pure CS nanofibers could not be electrospun
from pure CS dissolved
in 1% acetic acid. This was due to the high viscosity and tension
created by the polycationic nature of CS. CS nanofibers were produced
when a lower amount of CS was blended with PVA and CS interacted with
PVApolymers, forming H-bonds and thus reducing the polyelectrolyte
effect. A blend of PVA–CS with a higher amount of PVA produced
a nearly defect-free mesh of nanofibers with fiber diameters ranging
from 30 to 150 nm. To form nanofibers containing the BP extract, the
blend had to have a higher amount of PVA and the fiber diameter was
found to be in the range between 25 and 200 nm. Although the crude
extract of BP resulted in challenges during electrospinning and dissolution
of PVA due to the presence of tannins, it provided smoother nanofibers
than the other category. Composites of either crude extract or distilled
BP on combining with CS produced mixed results. While it was easier
to form electrospun nanofibers with PVA:DBP:CS, it was difficult to
get substantial fibers with PVA:EXT:CS. In the cases where combinations
with CS yielded nanofibers, the amount of PVA in the mixture played
a crucial role. Increasing the amount of PVA in the mixture reduced
the formation of beads and thus produced smooth fibers. Blended solutions
were best electrospun within 24 h of mixing to achieve smooth fiber
formation. The mixing has to be followed with a rest period of 4 h
to allow any hanging particles to fully settle. When the antibacterial
tests of these different blends of composites were carried out against E. coli and S. aureus, it was determined that nanofiber composites (PVA:DBP, PVA:DBP:CS,
PVA:EXT, and PVA:EXT:CS) showed higher antibacterial properties (74
and 83, 69.8 and 81.4, 75.9 and 86, and 75.4 and 91% against E. coli and S. aureus, respectively) than their parental form. The broad spectrum of the
antibacterial activity of BP and CS composite nanofibers can be applied
in the biomedical industry to counter the increased threat of antibacterial
resistance.
Materials and Methods
Materials
PVA (MW 125 000,
20–98% hydrolysis) was purchased from Sigma-Aldrich, Europe.
CSs (cg1600 with 76% degree of deacetylation and cg400 with 84.8%
degree of deacetylation) were purchased from Primex ehf (Chitoclear,
Iceland). BP was purchased from SEFA organic extracts Kampala Uganda,
and Difco LB agar medium and Difco LB (Luria-Bertani) broth media
were purchased from Becton Dickinson Company. The bacterial strains
used in this study were S. aureus ATCC
6538 and E. coli ATCC 8739.
Synthesis Procedures
Synthesis of Composite
Nanofibers
Figure is a schematic
representation illustrating the preparation steps of BP crude/distilled
extracts (EXT) and the composite nanofibers of PVA mixed with BP EXT
and with chitosan (CS). First, PVA, PVA:DBP, and PVA:EXT (PVA in EXT
and PVA in DBP) with percentages ranging from 7 to 12% were prepared
by two methods: (a) in situ by dissolving PVA powder (7.0–15.0
g) into BP solution (w/v) and (b) ex situ volumetric addition of PVA
solution (prepared by dissolving PVA (7.0–15.0 g) powder in
deionized water) to different solution volumes of the two BP separately
at a ratio of 2:1 up to 5:1 (v/v), respectively.
Figure 9
Schematic representation
of (a) preparation of the BP crude (i)
and distilled (ii) extracts. (b) Preparation of composite nanofibers.
The images were created using the mind graph and e-draw software.
Schematic representation
of (a) preparation of the BP crude (i)
and distilled (ii) extracts. (b) Preparation of composite nanofibers.
The images were created using the mind graph and e-draw software.After the successful preparation
of PVA:EXT solutions, the composites
of PVA:EXT:CS were prepared by mixing PVA, PVA:EXT (in situ), and
PVA:EXT (ex situ) with CS at a ratio ranging from 2:1 up to 5:1 (v/v)
and stirred at room temperature for 4 h.Each of the prepared
solutions was electrospun into nanofibers
using an electrospinner (E-Spin Tech, India) connected to a syringe
pump and high-voltage supply (Gamma high-voltage power supply). Solutions
from the above composites were loaded into 10 mL syringes and mounted
onto the pump, which was connected to the electrospinner through a
silicon tube. A solution flow rate ranging between 0.3 and 1.6 mL/h
was applied while being connected to the high applied voltage ranging
between 10 and 28 kV. The nanofibers were collected on aluminum foil
grounded on the metallic collector located 10–20 cm away from
the spinneret.
Characterization
Morphological Characterization
Scanning
Electron Microscopy (SEM)
In this characterization, SEM (FESEM,
Leo Supra 55—Zeiss Inc.,
Germany), field emission electron microscope was employed to determine
the morphological characteristics of the nanofibers. Samples for imaging
were prepared by cutting 2 cm2 of the aluminum foil containing
the fibers and put on the stage for SEM imaging. The FESEM was operated
at a working distance of 3 mm and probe current of 4 kV. In addition,
a bench-top SEM was used for EDX analysis to study the chemical elements
that are contained in the composite materials.
Chemical Characterization
Chemical
characterization was carried out by Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy
(FTIR) (Nicolet 380-Thermo Scientific). This technique was used to
determine the chemical composition of the materials before and after
blending to understand the interactions that existed when blended
and also the functional groups and characterizing their properties.
Samples used in the FTIR analysis included both powder and nanofibers
forms. A sample of both cases was mixed with KBr pellets and ground.
The mixture was ground at a ratio of 1:0.2 (KBr/sample, respectively)
because KBr was already thick as it is required that a small amount
of the sample is to be added (according to Beer Lambert’s law).
The samples were then compressed to form discs and then were placed
in the FTIR instrument and analyzed.
Physical
Characterization
Physical
properties including swelling and weight loss were tested following
the Moradkhannejhad et al. procedure with slight modification.[11]Cross-linked and non-cross-linked nanofibers
were immersed in a phosphate buffer solution (PBS) with a pH of 7.4
and were incubated at 37 °C for 24 h to determine the swelling
capability and thus the ability to absorb exudates with ease. Similarly,
to determine the degree of degradability of the nanofibers and thus
their stability in various applications, weighted nanofiber sheets
were immersed in PBS for 24 h followed by wiping off the surface PBS
and vacuum-drying the nanofibers for 3 h. Non-cross-linked nanofibers
are known to disintegrate fast in an aqueous environment than the
cross-linked nanofibers. Cross-linking of the nanofibers was done
by placing the nanofibers above glutaraldehyde in a desiccator for
12 h. Cross-linking can also be done after withdrawing them from water;
then, the nanofiber films were rinsed off the surface PBS using soft
white tissue and weighed to get the weight (Wt). Furthermore, they
were dried in a vacuum oven for 5 h and then weighed to get WD.[11] The percentages of degree of swelling and weight
loss were obtained from the two equations mentioned below, eqs and 2.[11]Wt is the weight after immersion in PBS, W0 is the dry weight before immersion in PBS,
and WD is the weight after drying the immersed fibers.[11]
Antibacterial Testing
The antibacterial
property of the nanocomposite fibers was determined by colony forming
unit (CFU) enumeration. This method gives information on the number
of viable bacteria following incubation with a bactericidal agent.
The colonies formed are counted, and percentage inhibition is determined.
Luria-Bertani (LB) broth and agar were prepared as per the manufacturer
instruction. The two bacterial strains used in this test were E. coli (top 10 MC1061) representing the Gram-negative
and S. aureus (ATCC 6538) representing
Gram-positive bacteria. PVA:EXT nanofibers were weighed, standardized
at 5 mg, and sterilized under a UV lamp for 2 h. Media containing E. coli and S. aureus (2 mL, 0.1 OD) with the samples (in triplicates) were incubated
for 24 h at 37 °C. As a control, 2 mL of bacterial culture and
2 mL of blank media (uncultured), to eliminate contamination errors,
were incubated at the same temperature and for the same duration.
A parallel experiment involving addition of 5 mg/mL nanofiber samples
into blank media to ascertain the sterility of the samples was also
carried out. After 24 h, the samples were serially diluted (to 1 ×
10–6 and 1 × 10–7) and 50
μL of the suspension was plated on LB agar plates, incubated
at 37 °C overnight, and the CFUs were counted the next day. Because
of the large cell count, we diluted the cultures with fresh sterilized
media to reach the following dilutions, 1 × 10–6 and 1 × 10–7, by adding 50 μL of the
diluted bacterial media into 450 μL of fresh media to allow
colony counting.Equation was used to calculate the control percentage[18]The minimum
inhibition concentration (MIC)
was also determined. Log reduction was calculated using eq (21)