| Literature DB >> 35159540 |
Ana Salević1, Dušica Stojanović2, Steva Lević1, Milena Pantić1, Verica Đorđević3, Radojica Pešić3, Branko Bugarski3, Vladimir Pavlović1, Petar Uskoković2, Viktor Nedović1.
Abstract
In this study, in order to develop zein-based, edible, functional food-contact materials in different forms incorporating sage extract (10, 20, and 30%), solvent casting and electrospinning were employed. The study aimed to assess the effects of the applied techniques and the extract's incorporation on the materials' properties. The solvent casting generated continuous and compact films, where the extract's incorporation provided more homogenous surfaces. The electrospinning resulted in non-woven mats composed of ribbon-like fibers in the range of 1.275-1.829 µm, while the extract's incorporation provided thinner and branched fibers. The results indicated the compatibility between the materials' constituents, and efficient and homogenous extract incorporation within the zein matrices, with more probable interactions occurring during the solvent casting. All of the formulations had a high dry matter content, whereas the mats and the formulations incorporating the extract had higher solubility and swelling in water. The films and mats presented similar DPPH• and ABTS•+ radical scavenging abilities, while the influence on Staphylococcus aureus and Salmonella enterica subsp. enterica serovar Typhimurium bacteria, and the growth inhibition, were complex. The antioxidant and antibacterial activity of the materials were more potent after the extract's incorporation. Overall, the results highlight the potential of the developed edible materials for use as food-contact materials with active/bioactive functionality.Entities:
Keywords: active edible packaging; antimicrobial activity; antioxidant activity; electrospinning; fiber mats; films; incorporation; sage extract; solvent casting; zein
Year: 2022 PMID: 35159540 PMCID: PMC8834357 DOI: 10.3390/foods11030390
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Foods ISSN: 2304-8158
Figure 1The SEM micrographs of the zein-based solvent-cast materials: plain film (A) and films incorporating 10 (B), 20 (C), and 30% (D) of the sage extract.
Figure 2The SEM micrographs of the zein-based electrospun materials (A1,B1,C1,D1) and the width distribution histograms (A2,B2,C2,D2): plain mat (A) and mats incorporating 10 (B), 20 (C), and 30% (D) of the sage extract.
Figure 3FT-IR spectra of the unloaded sage extract, native zein, and zein-based solvent-cast (a) and electrospun (b) materials.
Physical properties of the solvent-cast films and the electrospun mats.
| Sample | Dry Matter Content | Water Solubility | Swelling Degree |
|---|---|---|---|
| Zs.c. | 92.05 ± 4.13 a | 8.42 ± 0.21 a | 194.38 ± 9.52 a |
| Z-E10s.c. | 92.12 ± 2.26 a | 12.51 ± 0.51 b | 180.64 ± 8.11 a |
| Z-E20s.c. | 90.02 ± 4.41 a | 13.89 ± 0.62 b,c | 293.99 ± 7.20 b |
| Z-E30s.c. | 90.07 ± 3.68 a | 12.57 ± 0.62 b | 326.35 ± 13.32 b |
| Ze. | 91.12 ± 3.72 a | 9.86 ± 0.24 a | 302.85 ± 7.42 b |
| Z-E10e. | 91.33 ± 2.24 a | 15.50 ± 0.63 c | 321.29 ± 15.74 b |
| Z-E20e. | 91.29 ± 4.47 a | 20.17 ± 0.99 d | 462.26 ± 20.76 c |
| Z-E30e. | 91.82 ± 4.12 a | 24.54 ± 1.10 e | 462.76 ± 18.89 c |
Different letters within the same columns indicate a significant difference (p < 0.05) among the samples.
Antioxidant activity of the solvent-cast films and the electrospun mats.
| Sample | DPPH• Scavenging Ability | ABTS•+ Scavenging Ability |
|---|---|---|
| Zs.c. | 45.55 ± 1.20 a | 102.14 ± 4.18 a |
| Z-E10s.c. | 178.82 ± 0.80 b | 283.30 ± 13.61 b |
| Z-E20s.c. | 290.88 ± 6.07 c | 363.55 ± 17.97 c |
| Z-E30s.c. | 373.93 ± 6.31 d | 454.07 ± 25.61 d |
| Ze. | 45.00 ± 1.20 a | 91.24 ± 3.44 a |
| Z-E10e. | 176.06 ± 3.06 b | 284.31 ± 16.12 b |
| Z-E20e. | 300.54 ± 6.24 c | 372.80 ± 20.41 c |
| Z-E30e. | 367.42 ± 9.69 d | 469.43 ± 34.72 d |
Different letters within the same columns indicate a significant difference (p < 0.05) among the samples.
Antibacterial activity of the solvent-cast films and the electrospun mats against S. aureus and S. enterica serovar Typhimurium.
| Sample |
| |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Bacterial Count | CFU Reduction | Bacterial Count | CFU ReductionR | |
| Control | 10.45 ± 0.13 a | - | 10.51 ± 1.07 a | - |
| Zs.c. | 9.26 ± 0.02 b | 1.19 | 6.87 ± 0.07 b,c | 3.64 |
| Z-E10s.c. | 7.98 ± 0.16 c | 2.47 | 6.74 ± 0.20 b,c | 3.77 |
| Z-E20s.c. | 7.77 ± 0.18 c,d | 2.68 | 6.00 ± 0.00 b | 4.51 |
| Z-E30s.c. | 7.29 ± 0.05 e,f | 3.16 | 6.00 ± 0.00 b | 4.51 |
| Ze. | 9.21 ± 0.18 b | 1.24 | 10.35 ± 0.11 a | 0.16 |
| Z-E10e. | 7.52 ± 0.04 d,e | 2.93 | 9.74 ± 0.35 a,d | 0.77 |
| Z-E20e. | 7.42 ± 0.05 d,e,f | 3.03 | 8.47 ± 0.33 d,e | 2.04 |
| Z-E30e. | 7.01 ± 0.09 f | 3.44 | 8.13 ± 0.25 c,e | 2.38 |
Different letters within the same columns indicate a significant difference (p < 0.05) among the samples.