| Literature DB >> 35012123 |
María Alonso-González1,2, Manuel Felix2, Alberto Romero2.
Abstract
Rice bran is an underutilized by-product of rice production, containing proteins, lipids and carbohydrates (mainly starches). Proteins and starches have been previously used to produce rice bran-based bioplastics, providing a high-added-value by-product, while contributing to the development of biobased, biodegradable bioplastics. However, rice bran contains oil (18-22%), which can have a detrimental effect on bioplastic properties. Its extraction could be convenient, since rice bran oil is becoming increasingly attractive due to its variety of applications in the food, pharmacy and cosmetic industries. In this way, the aim of this work was to analyze the effect of the different components of rice bran on the final properties of the bioplastics. Rice bran refining was carried out by extracting the oil and fiber fractions, and the effects of these two procedures on the final properties were addressed with mechanical, functional and microstructural measures. Results revealed that defatted rice bran produced bioplastics with higher viscoelastic moduli and better tensile behavior while decreasing the water uptake capacity and the soluble matter loss of the samples. However, no significant improvements were observed for systems produced from fiber-free rice bran. The microstructures observed in the SEM micrographs matched the obtained results, supporting the conclusions drawn.Entities:
Keywords: bioplastics; injection molding; rice bran; rice bran oil; starch; valorization
Year: 2021 PMID: 35012123 PMCID: PMC8747368 DOI: 10.3390/polym14010100
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Polymers (Basel) ISSN: 2073-4360 Impact factor: 4.329
Chemical composition of the different active matters employed: rice bran (RB), defatted rice bran (DRB) and fiber-free rice bran (FRB).
| Composition | RB | DRB | FRB |
|---|---|---|---|
| Moisture (%) | 12.5 ± 5.0 | 15.9 ± 5.0 | 16.8 ± 3.4 |
| Ashes (%) | 10.5 ± 0.3 | 13.4 ± 0.5 | 24.6 ± 0.5 |
| Lipids (%) | 22.8 ± 1.3 | 1.8 ± 0.6 | 5.8 ± 1.6 |
| Proteins (%) | 13.2 ± 0.5 | 16.8 ± 0.5 | 15.7 ± 1.0 |
| Fiber (%) | 22.0 ± 1.0 | 27.9 ± 1.0 | 3.0 ± 1.0 |
| Starches (%) | 19.0 ± 1.0 | 24.2 ± 1.0 | 34.1 ± 1.0 |
Figure 1Frequency sweep tests performed between 0.1 and 20 Hz of the different studied systems (RBS, RBG, DRBS, DRBG, FRBS, and FRBG) carried out at room temperature.
Figure 2Temperature sweep tests between −10 and 160 °C performed on the different evaluated systems at 1 Hz; (a) Elastic (E′) and viscous (E″) modulus (b) Loss tangent (tan δ).
Figure 3Stress-strain curves obtained for the different evaluated systems at 1 mm/min and room temperature.
Young’s modulus (YM), maximum stress (MS) and deformation at break (DB) of the different evaluated systems obtained from the stress-strain curves.
| System | YM (MPa) | MS (MPa) | DB (mm/mm) |
|---|---|---|---|
| RBS | 156 ± 6 C* | 1.00 ± 0.10 FG | 1.26 ± 0.18 J |
| RBG | 53 ± 1 A | 0.42 ± 0.04 E | 2.03 ± 0.13 K |
| DRBS | 227 ± 11 D | 2.30 ± 0.30 I | 1.82 ± 0.20 K |
| DRBG | 104 ± 2 B | 1.17 ± 0.03 GH | 3.04 ± 0.26 L |
| FRBS | 171 ± 17 C | 1.33 ± 0.06 H | 1.36 ± 0.23 J |
| FRBG | 106 ± 9 B | 0.90 ± 0.09 F | 2.11 ± 0.13 K |
* Different superscript letters within the column indicate significant differences (p < 0.05). Significant differences are indicated by different letters, all mean values labeled with the same letter did not show significant differences.
Figure 4(a) Water uptake capacity (WUC) and (b) soluble matter loss (SML) of the different evaluated systems. Different letters above columns indicate significant differences (p < 0.05).
Figure 5SEM micrographs of the different lyophilized bioplastics observed (A) RBS; (B) RBG; (C) DRBS; (D) DRBG; (E) FRBS; (F) FRBG.