| Literature DB >> 34062759 |
Maria Gabriela De Paola1, Rosy Paletta1, Catia Giovanna Lopresto1, Giuseppe Emanuele Lio2, Antonio De Luca2, Sudip Chakraborty1, Vincenza Calabrò1.
Abstract
Starch-based films are promising alternatives to synthetic films in food packaging. They were widely studied in terms of mechanical and optical properties. In food packaging, optical properties are of great interest because ultra violet (UV-light) protection is strictly required. Nevertheless, the characterization of film-forming dispersions was poorly addressed, especially regarding its correlation with the film produced. In this work, we characterized film-forming dispersions at different compositions of starch and carboxymethyl cellulose (CMC) by Turbiscan. This instrument is based on multiple light scattering and gives significant information about the miscibility of polymers in the dispersed phase. Indeed, it identifies the phenomena of destabilization and phase separation before their visibility to the unaided eye. This work aimed to study whether the homogeneous/inhomogeneous morphology of films could be forecast by the analysis of profiles obtained in the dispersed phase. The films produced were investigated by optical microscopy and absorbance analysis. As the CMC fraction increased, Turbiscan showed reduced phase separation. This implies better miscibility of mixture components and higher gelification degree. The related film was more homogeneous and presented higher UV absorbance. Consequently, film-forming dispersions and optical properties of films are strictly correlated and Turbiscan-based analysis is very useful to investigate the dispersion stability and predict the film quality.Entities:
Keywords: Turbiscan; carboxymethyl cellulose; characterization; film-forming dispersions; optical properties; starch-based films
Year: 2021 PMID: 34062759 PMCID: PMC8124922 DOI: 10.3390/polym13091464
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Polymers (Basel) ISSN: 2073-4360 Impact factor: 4.329
Composition and preparation method of dispersions.
| Dispersion | Composition | Preparation |
|---|---|---|
| S | 5 g starch | 5 min at room temperature + 30 min at 90 °C |
| CMC1 | 0.5 g CMC | 15 min at 75 °C |
| CMC2 | 0.75 g CMC | 15 min at 75 °C |
| CMC3 | 1 g CMC | 15 min at 75 °C |
| S-CMC1 | S+CMC1 | 10 min at 75 °C |
| S-CMC2 | S+CMC2 | 10 min at 75 °C |
| S-CMC3 | S+CMC3 | 10 min at 75 °C |
Figure 1Main phenomena of destabilization in dispersions observed by Turbiscan analysis: (a) sedimentation; (b) flocculation/coalescence; and (c) creaming. (adapted from [16]).
Figure 2Profiles of Delta transmittance, ΔT(%), in each dispersion sample (analysis time: 24 h) (a) S-CMC1, (b) S-CMC2, and (c) S-CMC3.
Figure 3Profiles of Turbiscan stability index (TSI) over time for dispersions S-CMC1, S-CMC2, and S-CMC3.
Figure 4The micrographs show the surface morphology of the three produced films: (a) S-CMC1; (b) S-CMC2; and (c) S-CMC3. The images have been collected using a Zeiss microscope in reflection mode using an input objective lens with a magnification of 50×. Each image shows a 40 × 100 μm2 portion of film sample.
Figure 5Quantitative assessment of the inhomogeneity degree of films: (a) Plot of the average of each sample profile function, after the optical image conversion into grayscale images by ImageJ software; (b) standard deviation of grey values related to inhomogeneity of films (11.8 for S-CMC1; 3.8 for S-CMC2; and 1.8 for S-CMC3).
Figure 6Absorbance spectra showing different behavior as a function of the concentration of CMC in the investigated films.
Figure 7The opacity of the three films, evaluated at 600 nm by Equation (2).