| Literature DB >> 31835317 |
Hongbo Chen1, Jingjing Wang1, Yaohua Cheng1, Chuansheng Wang1,2, Haichao Liu3, Huiguang Bian1, Yiren Pan1, Jingyao Sun3,4, Wenwen Han3,5.
Abstract
As the IV generation of packaging, biopolymers, with the advantages of biodegradability, process ability, combination possibilities and no pollution to food, have become the leading food packaging materials. Biopolymers can be directly extracted from biomass, synthesized from bioderived monomers and produced directly by microorganisms which are all abundant and renewable. The raw materials used to produce biopolymers are low-cost, some even coming from agrion dustrial waste. This review summarized the advances in protein-based films and coatings for food packaging. The materials studied to develop protein-based packaging films and coatings can be divided into two classes: plant proteins and animal proteins. Parts of proteins are referred in this review, including plant proteins i.e., gluten, soy proteins and zein, and animal proteins i.e., casein, whey and gelatin. Films and coatings based on these proteins have excellent gas barrier properties and satisfactory mechanical properties. However, the hydrophilicity of proteins makes the protein-based films present poor water barrier characteristics. The application of plasticizers and the corresponding post-treatments can make the properties of the protein-based films and coatings improved. The addition of active compounds into protein-based films can effectively inhibit or delay the growth of microorganisms and the oxidation of lipids. The review also summarized the research about the storage requirements of various foods that can provide corresponding guidance for the preparation of food packaging materials. Numerous application examples of protein-based films and coatings in food packaging also confirm their important role in food packaging materials.Entities:
Keywords: active protein-based films; applications for food-packaging; plasticizers; properties; protein-based films and coatings
Year: 2019 PMID: 31835317 PMCID: PMC6960667 DOI: 10.3390/polym11122039
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Polymers (Basel) ISSN: 2073-4360 Impact factor: 4.329
Figure 1Categories and origins of the biopolymers.
Figure 2Life Cycle of Biopolymer Packaging Materials. Reproduced with permission from [6].
Natural plasticizers used in protein-based films and coatings.
| System of Application | Plasticizer | References |
|---|---|---|
| Zein | Oleic and linoleic acids | [ |
| Whey protein | GLY and sorbitol | [ |
| Wheat gluten | saturated fatty acids | [ |
| Glycerin | [ | |
| Caseinate-pullulan | Water and sorbitol | [ |
| Whey protein/beeswax emulsion | GLY | [ |
| Gelatin | GLY and sorbitol | [ |
| Sucrose, oleic acid, citric acid, tartaric acid, malic acid, PEG of different molecular weights (300, 400, 600, 800, 1500, 4000,10,000 and 20,000), sorbitol, mannitol, EG, DEG, TEG, EA, di ethanol amine (DEA) and TEA | [ | |
| Pigskin gelatin | GLY | [ |
| Sorbitol | [ | |
| Bovine gelatin | Fatty acids | [ |
| Sorbitol | [ | |
| GLY | [ |
Biopolymer and common commercial films, properties reported.
| Films | Plasticizers | Opacity (A.nm) | Mechanical Properties (TS in MPa) | Thermal Properties | Water Vaper Permeability | References |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Wheat gluten | ||||||
| Gliadins | Gly 35% | ~34 | %E = ~390 TS = ~7 | NR | ~7 × 1011 [(gm)/(m2 s Pa)] | [ |
| Glutenins | Gly 35% | ~101 | %E = ~250 TS = ~1 | NR | ~4 × 1011 [(g m)/(m2 s Pa)] | |
| Other Sources | ||||||
| Zein | Gly 40% | NR | %E = ~118 TS = ~4 | ~4 (g mm/m2 h kPa) | [ | |
| Kafirin | Gly 40% | NR | %E = ~24 TS = ~1 | ~8 (g mm/m2 h kPa) | ||
| Avenin | Gly 40% | NR | %E = ~40 TS = ~4 | ~3 (g mm/m2 h kPa) | ||
| Milk | ||||||
| Casein | Gly 50% | NR | %E = ~65 TS = ~2.5 | NR | ~7 (g mm/m2 h kPa) | [ |
| Whey fraction | ||||||
| WPI | Gly 40% | NR | %E = ~33 TS = ~0.9 | ~8 (g mm/m2 d kPa) | [ | |
| WPC | Gly 40% | NR | %E = ~18 TS = ~0.7 | Tg = ~43 °C | ~10 (g mm/m2 d kPa) | |
| Synthetic polymers | ||||||
| High Density Polyethylene (HDPE) | NR | NR | %E = ~600 TS = ~54 | Tg = ~80 °C | ~6 (g/m2 d) | [ |
| Low Density Polyethylene (LDPE) | NR | NR | %E = ~300 TS = ~27 | Tg = ~−125 °C | ~18 (g/m2 d) | |
| Polypropylene (PP) | NR | NR | %E = ~150 TS = ~151 | Tg = ~−10 °C | ~8 (g/m2 d) | |
| Polyethylene Terephthalate (PET) | NR | NR | %E = 70 TS = 79 | Tg = ~76 °C | ~21 (g/m2 d) | |
Figure 3Antimicrobial property of (a) control film with lettuce microflora; (b) 10% thyme essential oil (TO) film with Escherichia coli and (c) 15% TO film with broccoli microflora. Reproduced with permission from [71].
Figure 4The addition of sorbitol or glycerol could reduce shrinkage during drying and improve the properties of edible films. Reproduced with permission from [109].
Figure 5Gelatin films fabricated by blown-extrusion using yucca extract and glycerol. Reproduced with permission from [149].
Recommended atmosphere conditions for the preservation of fresh fruits and vegetables [161].
| Group | Commodity | CO2 (%) a | O2 (%) a |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Potatoes | 0 | 0 |
| Carrots | 0 | 0 | |
| Beets | 0 | 0 | |
| 2 | Tomatoes | 0 | 3–5 |
| Peppers | 0 | 3–5 | |
| Cucumbers | 0 | 3–5 | |
| Lettuce | 0 | 2–5 | |
| Celery | 0 | 2–4 | |
| Onions(dry) | 0 | 1–2 | |
| 3 | Pears | 0–5 | 1–3 |
| Lemons | 0–5 | 5 | |
| Apples | 1–5 | 2–3 | |
| Cauliflowers | 2–5 | 2–5 | |
| Artichokes | 3–5 | 2–3 | |
| Peaches | 5 | 1–2 | |
| 4 | Others | 5–15 | 1–5 |
a Percentages are volume or mole percentage; the remainder is nitrogen.
Applications of protein-based films and coatings for dairy products.
| Product, Storage | Film | Added Values | Effects | References | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fresh | Zein (Z)/carnauba wax (5%) composite films (ZW) | Lysozyme (0.7 mg/cm2) (L) |
| C and F-Z did not change significantly counts in the first 28 days, but the counts of these controls increased between the 28th and 56th days | [ |
| Mixture of lysozyme (0.7 mg/cm2), catechin (3 mg/cm2) and gallic acid (3.0 mg/cm2) (MIX) | Lipid oxidation/TBARS | C > F-Z = AF-Z-L = AF-ZW-L (no significant effect) >AF-Z-MIX = AF-ZW-MIX (significantly lower) | |||
| Unripened, creamy | Chitosan/whey protein coating | pH | C = ACO (decrease, after 7, and remained relatively constant until 30 days) | [ | |
| Titratable acidity | C (increased) > ACO (no significant differences) | ||||
| LAB | C > ACO | ||||
| Mesophilic acrobic bacteria | C > ACO | ||||
| Psychrotrophic bacteria | C > ACO | ||||
| Acidity | Delayed development by ACO | ||||
| Sensory quality | No effect of ACO | ||||
| Shelf-life | C < ACO | ||||
| Cheddar cheese, 5 ± 1 °C, 30 days | Casein (CS) Whey protein concentrate (WPC) films | Soluble nitrogen | C = F-CS = F-WPC (125.7–151.2 mgN2/100 g) | [ | |
| TBARS | C (0.01–0.05) > F-CS = F-WPC (0.01–0.04) | ||||
| Titratable acidity | C > F-CS = F-WPC | ||||
| TVC | C = F-CS = F-WPC (7.8–8.1 log CFU/g) | ||||
| Yeast, mold | C (1.1–1.9 log CFU/g) >F-CS = F-WPC (1.1–1.8 log CFU/g) | ||||
| Sensory | No significant effect | ||||
| Semisoft, mini | Sodium caseinate film | Nisin (1000 IU/cm2 surface area AF) | *Inoculated product was put on active film for analyses | [ | |
| Surface-contaminated cheese | C > AF (1.1 log) | ||||
| In-depth contaminated cheese, mm distance of film from contaminated spot | AF, 3 mm (0.25 log) > AF, 2 mm (0.9 log) > AF, 1 mm (1.1 log) | ||||
| Sodium caseinate (SC) | Psychrotrophic bacteria | C > F-SC = CO-SC > F-CH = CO-CH = F-SC/CH = CO-SC/CH | [ | ||
| Chitosan/sodium caseinate (SC/CH) films | Yeast | C > F-SC = CO-SC > F-CH = CO-CH = F-SC/CH = CO-SC/CH | |||
| Molds | C > F-SC = CO-SC > F-CH = CO-CH = F-SC/CH = CO-SC/CH | ||||
| Fresh | Wheat gluten (WG) methyl cellulose (MC) films | Natamycin 1.2 mg NA/10 g film solution 2.5 mg NA/10 g film solution 3.10 mg NA/10 g film solution 4.20 mg NA/10 g film solution |
| C > F-MC (0.6 log) = AF-MC1 (no significant reduction) >AF-MC2 (2 log) = AF-MC3 = AF-MC4 C > F-WG (4.11 log) > AF-WG1 (completely inhibited) = AF-MC2 = AF-MC3 = AF-MC4 | [ |
Abbreviations: ACO, Active coated sample; AF, active film; C, uncoated sample; CO, coated sample; F, film; log, log CFU/g reduction compared to control; MC, moisture content; TBARS, thiobarbituric acid reactive substances; TVC, total viable counts.
Protein-based films and coatings for meat and products.
| Product, Storage | Films/Coatings | Added Value | Effect | References | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fresh beef cuts: 5 °C, 12 days | Whey protein isolate | Cinnamon, cumin, thyme essential oil (TO) | TVC (shelf life) | C = F < AF-cinnamon (4–12 days) < AF-cumin (6–12 days) < AF with-thyme (8–>12 days) | [ |
| Rainbow trout fillets vacuum: 4 °C, 26 days | Gelatin | LEO | TVC, psychrotrophic bacteria counts, | C < F < AF 0.1% LEO < AF 1% LEO | [ |
| Color, pH increase, TVB-N, free fatty acid, PV, and TBARS | Preservative effect followed increasing order: C < F < AF 0.1% LEO < AF 1% LEO | ||||
| Sensory shelf life | AF 1 % LEO (22 days) > AF 0.1% LEO = F (20 days) > C (15 days) | ||||
| Mackerel meat powder: 28–30 °C, 30% RH, 30 days | Gelatin with CNa lid sealed to aluminum cups | Coconut husk ethanol extract (CH) | Oxidation (PV, TBARS, and volatile compounds) | Decrease in AF–CNa–CH | [ |
| Moisture absorption | Decrease in AF–CNa–CH | ||||
| Ground beef patties vacuum: 4 °C, 12 days | Isolated soy protein | TBARS | No effect | [ | |
| PV and free fatty acids | Lower values were determined for AF-OR or AF-TH particularly at later stages of storage | ||||
| Color | Reduced, but acceptable, redness (a*) values | ||||
| TVC, LAB, and | No effect of films | ||||
| Coliform bacteria and | Reduced in AFs | ||||
| Fresh beef cuts: 5 °C, 12 days | Whey protein isolate | Sodium lactate (NaL); ε-polylysine (ε-PL) | TVC (shelf life) | C = F (6 days) <AF– | [ |
| Pseudomonades counts | C = F > AF- ɛ–PL 0.25% = AF-NaL 1% > AF-ɛ–PL 0.75% = AF-NaL 2% | ||||
| LAB counts | C = F = AF-NaL 1% = AF-NaL 2% > AF-ɛ–PL 0.25% > AF-ɛ–PL 0.75% | ||||
| Indian salmon fillets 6 °C, 16 days | Gelatin chitosan; T1: gelatin; T2: gelatin + chitosan + garlic extract; T3: gelatin + chitosan + lime juice | Lime extract; garlic extract | TBARS (shelf life) | C (8 days) < T2 < T1 = T3 (16 days) | [ |
| TVB-N (shelf life) | No effect of coatings (between 8 and 12 days) | ||||
| pH increase | C = T1 > T3 > T2 | ||||
| TVC (shelf life) | C = T1 (8 days) < T3 (16 days) < T2 (above 16 days) | ||||
| Psychrophilic count | C = T1 > T3 (2 log) > T2 (3 log) | ||||
| Sensory shelf life | C (8–12 days) < T1 = T3 (12–16 days) < T2 (16 days) | ||||
| Rainbow Trout Fillets: 4 °C, 16 days | WPC | LPOS | TVB-N | Reduced | [ |
| Bacterial growth | Reduced | ||||
| pH changes | Reduced | ||||
| Lipid oxidation | No effect | ||||
| Sensory shelf life | Extended by 4 days for ACO with 1.25% ( | ||||
| Grass carp fish balls: 4 °C, 20 days | Corn zein | Hexadentate 3-hydroxypyridinones (polymeric chelator) | Sensory properties | C < CO < ACO (similar till 10th day and than considerable differences) | [ |
| TVB-N | C > CO > ACO | ||||
| TBARS | C > CO > ACO | ||||
| TVC | C > CO (2 log) > ACO (4 log) | ||||
| pH | ACO maintained stable pH during storage | ||||
| Shelf life | C (7 days) < CO (13 days) < ACO (19 days) | ||||
Abbreviations: ACO, Active coated sample; AF, active film; C, uncoated sample; CNa, cloisite Na+; CO, coated sample; F, film; LAB, lactic acid bacteria; LEO, laurel essential oil; LPOS, lacto per oxidase system; PV, peroxide value; TBARS, thio barbituric acid reactive substances; TVB-N, total volatile based nitrogen; TVC, total viable counts.
Applications of antibacterial agents in protein-based films.
| Antimicrobial Agents | Microorganisms | Performance Impact of Protein-Based Films | References | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Bacteriocins | nisin | The strength was increased and the permeability was decreased. | [ | |
| ε-polylysine | Spoilage flora of fresh beef | The strength was decreased and the flexibility was increased. | [ | |
| EDTA |
| There was a minimal effect on the mechanical properties. | [ | |
| Acidulant agents | sodium lactate, potassium sorbate, and citric, acetic, malic, lactic, tartaric, sorbic and paminobenzoicacids |
| The water-content equilibrium, water vapor permeability, and extensibility that affected the glass-transition temperature of the film were increased. | [ |
| Antimicrobial enzymes | Lacto Per Oxidase System (LPOS) and lysozyme |
| The film structure and integrity were weakened, but when the concentration of active compounds was low, the film’s properties would not be affected. | [ |
| EOs | lemon peel, Zataria multiflora Boiss, orange leaves, cinnamon, thyme, clove and oregano | Pathogens and food-spoilage microorganisms | The permeability, water solubility, strength and extensibility were decreased. | [ |
| Commercially derived antimicrobials | ArticoateDLP-02, Artimex 152/NL, sodium octanoate, and Auranta FV | The protein network was destabilized. | [ | |
| Ethyl-Nα-dodecanoyl-L-Arginate hydrochloride (LAE) | A barrier against carbon dioxide and oxygen was formed. | [ | ||
| Prunin Laurate ester (PL) | The functional properties were not affected. | [ | ||
| NPs | Silver Nano Particles (AgNP) | foodborne pathogens | The barrier and mechanical properties were enhanced, but there might be potential toxicity. | [ |