| Literature DB >> 35808579 |
Orapan Romruen1, Pimonpan Kaewprachu2,3, Thomas Karbowiak4, Saroat Rawdkuen1,5.
Abstract
Cellulose nanospheres (CN) have been considered a leading type of nanomaterial that can be applied as a strengthening material in the production of nanocomposites. This work aimed to isolate and characterize the properties of CN from different agricultural by-products. CNs were successfully isolated from rice straw, corncob, Phulae pineapple leaf and peel using acid hydrolysis (60% H2SO4) combined with homogenization-sonication (homogenized at 12,000 rpm for 6 min and ultrasonicated for 10 min). The results showed that the CN from rice straw (RS-CN) and corncob (CC-CN) exhibited high yields (22.27 and 22.36%) (p < 0.05). All hydrolyzed CNs exhibited a spherical shape with a diameter range of 2 to 127 nm. After acid hydrolysis, Fourier transform infrared (FTIR) results showed no impurities. X-ray diffraction (XRD) showed that the structure of cellulose was changed from cellulose-I to cellulose-II. However, cellulose-I remained in pineapple peel cellulose nanosphere (PP-CN). The crystalline index (CI) ranged from 43.98 to 73.58%, with the highest CI obtained in the CC-CN. The CN from all sources presented excellent thermal stability (above 300 °C). The functional properties, including water absorption Index (WAI), water solubility index (WSI) and swelling capacity were investigated. PP-CN showed the highest WAI and swelling capacity, while the PL-CN had the highest WSI (p < 0.05). Among all samples, CC-CN showed the highest extraction yield, small particle size, high CI, and desirable functional properties to be used as a material for bio-nanocomposites film.Entities:
Keywords: acid hydrolysis; agricultural waste valorization; cellulose nanosphere; functional property; homogenization; ultrasonication
Year: 2022 PMID: 35808579 PMCID: PMC9269051 DOI: 10.3390/polym14132534
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Polymers (Basel) ISSN: 2073-4360 Impact factor: 4.967
Extraction yield, crystal phase and crystallinity index (CI) of cellulose nanosphere extracted from different sources compared with commercial cellulose.
| Source of Cellulose Nanosphere | Extraction Yield (%, | Crystal Phase | Crystallinity Index (%) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Rice straw | 22.27 ± 0.46 a | type II | 58.43 |
| Corncob | 22.36 ± 0.14 a | type II | 73.58 |
| Pineapple leave | 12.06 ± 1.12 b | type II | 64.75 |
| Pineapple peel | 6.69 ± 0.54 c | type I | 43.98 |
| Commercial cellulose | - | type II | 63.23 |
* Values are presented as mean ± standard deviation (n = 3) and different superscripts (a–c) are significantly different (p < 0.05).
Figure 1Scanning electron micrograph of cellulose nanosphere isolated from different sources compared with commercial cellulose: (a) rice straw, (b) corncob, (c) pineapple leaf, (d) pineapple peel, and (e) commercial cellulose (magnification 50 k×).
Figure 2FTIR spectra (a) and XRD spectra (b) of cellulose nanosphere isolated from different sources compared with commercial cellulose. RS-CN: rice straw cellulose nanosphere; CC-CN: corncob cellulose nanosphere; PL-CN: pineapple leaves cellulose nanosphere; PP-CN: pineapple peels cellulose nanosphere; COM-CN: cellulose nanosphere hydrolyzed from commercial cellulose.
Figure 3TGA (a), DTG (b), and DSC (c) curves of cellulose nanosphere isolated from different sources compared with commercial cellulose. RS-CN: rice straw cellulose nanosphere; CC-CN: corncob cellulose nanosphere; PL-CN: pineapple leaves cellulose nanosphere; PP-CN: pineapple peels cellulose nanosphere; COM-CN: cellulose nanosphere hydrolyzed from commercial cellulose.
Thermal properties of cellulose nanosphere from different sources compared with commercial cellulose.
| Source of Cellulose Nanosphere | TGA Analysis | DSC Analysis | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Tonset (°C) | Tmax (C) | Residue at 600 °C (%) | Tonset (°C) | Tmax (°C) | ΔH (J/g) | |
| Rice straw | 304.22 | 314.67 | 27.54 | 275.94 | 302.00 | 177.04 |
| Corncob | 301.60 | 318.00 | 25.38 | 305.13 | 317.33 | 133.55 |
| Pineapple leaf | 295.62 | 323.33 | 25.03 | 295.42 | 318.00 | 120.44 |
| Pineapple peel | 302.25 | 327.67 | 23.34 | 296.10 | 327.33 | 191.44 |
| Commercial cellulose | 305.49 | 313.67 | 25.29 | 276.24 | 302.33 | 176.14 |
TGA: thermo-gravimetric analyzer; DSC: differential scanning calorimeter; Tonset: onset decomposition temperature; Tmax: peak decomposition temperature; ΔH: enthalpy change.
Functional properties of cellulose nanosphere from different sources compared with commercial cellulose.
| Source of Cellulose Nanosphere | WAI (g/g) | WSI (%) | Swelling Capacity (mL/g) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Rice straw | 7.77 ± 0.15 c | 2.01 ± 0.09 c | 1.91 ± 0.07 c |
| Corncob | 6.82 ± 0.02 cd | 3.64 ± 0.22 b | 2.96 ± 0.03 b |
| Pineapple leaf | 9.30 ± 1.46 b | 9.57 ± 1.06 a | 1.89 ± 0.09 c |
| Pineapple peel | 14.24 ± 0.25 a | 1.57 ± 0.19 c | 9.01 ± 0.10 a |
| Commercial cellulose | 6.18 ± 0.41 d | 1.81 ± 0.20 c | 2.95 ± 0.03 b |
Values are presented as mean ± standard deviation (n = 3). Different superscripts (a–d) in each column are significantly different (p < 0.05). WAI: water absorption index, WSI: water solubility index.