| Literature DB >> 36236161 |
Siti Fatma Abd Karim1, Juferi Idris1,2, Junaidah Jai1, Mohibah Musa1, Ku Halim Ku Hamid1.
Abstract
Biodegradable film packaging made from thermoplastic starch (TPS) has low mechanical performance and high water solubility, which is incomparable with synthetic films. In this work, Aloe vera (AV) gel and plasticized soluble potato starch were utilised to improve the mechanical stability and water solubility of TPS. Dried starch was mixed with glycerol and different AV gel concentrations (0% to 50%). The TPS + 50% AV gel (30 g TPS + 15 g AV gel) showed the best improvement compared to TPS alone. When compared to similar TPS films with AV gel added, this film is stronger and dissolves better in water. Mechanical qualities improved the tensile strength and Young's modulus of the TPS film, with 1.03 MPa to 9.14 MPa and 51.92 MPa to 769.00 MPa, respectively. This was supported by the improvement of TPS water solubility from 57.44% to 46.6% and also by the increase in decomposition temperature of the TPS. This promises better heat resistance. The crystallinity percentage increase to 24.26% suggested that the formation of hydrogen bonding between TPS and AV gel enhanced crosslinking in the polymeric structure. By adding AV gel, the TPS polymeric structure is improved and can be used as a biodegradable food-packaging film.Entities:
Keywords: Aloe vera gel; biodegradable film; crosslinker; polymer characterization; thermoplastic starch
Year: 2022 PMID: 36236161 PMCID: PMC9571595 DOI: 10.3390/polym14194213
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Polymers (Basel) ISSN: 2073-4360 Impact factor: 4.967
Figure 1The torque value of TPS film with different AV gel concentrations.
The tensile strength, elongation at break, Young’s modulus, and thickness of TPS film at different concentrations of AV gel.
| SAMPLE | TS ± SD | EAB ± SD | YM ± SD | Thick ± SD |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| TPS (control) | 1.03 ± 0.34 a | 11.26 ± 1.88 a | 51.92 ± 15.50 a | 0.2342 ± 0.03 a |
| TPS + 10% AV | 4.48 ± 1.68 b | 5.63 ± 1.87 b | 189.79 ± 106.49 b | 0.4357 ± 0.08 b |
| TPS + 20% AV | 6.71 ± 1.90 c | 1.62 ± 0.48 c | 443.04 ± 284.27 c | 0.4471 ± 0.08 c |
| TPS + 30% AV | 7.78 ± 1.67 d | 2.11 ± 0.99 d | 504.33 ± 174.98 d | 0.4484 ± 0.06 d |
| TPS + 40% AV | 8.96 ± 1.80 e | 1.83 ± 0.82 e | 687.67 ± 159.46 e | 0.5094 ± 0.07 e |
| TPS + 50% AV | 9.14 ± 1.47 f | 2.02 ± 0.99 f | 769.00 ± 88.07 f | 0.5127 ± 0.05 f |
TS—mean of tensile strength ± SD, EAB—mean of elongation at break ± SD, YM—mean of Young’s modulus ± SD, WA—mean of water absorption ± SD, WS—mean of water solubility ± SD, thick—mean of thickness ± SD. Different letters indicate significant differences between the values at the level of significance, p < 0.0083 (Bonferroni adjustment), one-way ANOVA, post-hoc t-test. Values are mean ± SD (standard deviation).
Figure 2The percentages of water absorption and water solubility of TPS film with different AV gel concentrations. Different letters indicate significant differences between the values at the level of significance, p < 0.0083 (Bonferroni adjustment), one-way ANOVA, post-hoc t-test. Values are mean ± SD (standard deviation).
Figure 3(a) The thermogravimetric and (b) the derivative thermogravimetric (DTG) analyses of TPS film with different AV gel concentrations.
Figure 4DSC of TPS film with different AV gel concentrations.
Figure 5X-ray diffraction pattern of TPS film with different AV gel concentrations.
Figure 6The physical appearance of TPS film with different AV gel concentrations.
Figure 7The morphological structure of TPS film with different AV gel concentrations at 500× magnifications.
Figure 8(a) The FTIR spectra for TPS, AV gel, and TPS + 30% AV and (b) the FTIR spectra of TPS film with different AV gel concentrations.
Summary of results.
| Characterization | TPS Film | TPS/10% AV–TPS/50% AV |
|---|---|---|
| Tensile strength, MPa | 1.03 ± 0.34 a | 4.48 ± 1.68 b–9.14 ± 1.47 f |
| Elongation at break, % | 11.26 ± 1.88 a | 5.63 ± 1.87 b–2.02 ± 0.99 f |
| Young’s modulus, MPa | 51.92 ± 15.50 a | 189.79 ± 106.49 b–769.00 ± 88.07 f |
| Water absorption, % | 134.33 ± 10.69 a | 237.67 ± 13.05 b–326.46 ± 4.43 f |
| Water solubility, % | 57.44 ± 2.52 a | 55.74 ± 4.07 b–46.65 ± 1.76 f |
| Maximum temperature, Tmax, °C | 304.87 | 307.75–312.29 |
| Melting temperature, Tm, °C | 306.89 | 307.01–320.93 |
| Crystallinity, % | 17.2458 | 17.6077–24.4592 |
| Thickness, mm | 0.2342 ± 0.03 a | 0.4357 ± 0.08 b–0.5127 ± 0.05 f |
| Physical appearance |
| |
| Morphology |
| |
| Functional group | 3288 cm−1 (broader and sharper) | |
Different letters indicate significant differences between the values at the level of significance, p < 0.0083 (Bonferroni adjustment), one-way ANOVA, post-hoc t-test. Values are mean ± SD (standard deviation).
Comparison with other studies.
| Sources | Method | Formulation | TS (MPa) | EAB (%) | YM (MPa) | TGA | Tm (°C) | Crystallinity (%) | Thickness (mm) | Water Absorption (%) | Water Solubility (%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| This paper | Melt-blend and hot-press technique | Potato starch + glycerol + AV gel: 10–50% | 9.14 | 2.11 | 769 | 304.87 increased to 307.75–312.29 | Peak shift from: | 24.46 | 0.52 | 326.46 | 46.65 |
| [ | Film-forming solution | Plantain flour + glycerol + | - | - | - | 100, 160–290, 330 | - | 9–16 | 0.017–0.042 | - | 55–57 |
| [ | Film-forming solution | Plantain flour + glycerol + | 1.43–2.1 | 24–31 | 82–190 | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| [ | Casting | Corn starch + glycerol + AV: starch: 1:3, 1:2, and 1:1 | - | - | - | - | - | 6.8–13.1 | 0.064–0.067 | - | - |
| [ | Film-forming solution | Plantain starch + chitosan + sorbitol + | 9.7–4.6 | 30.3–10.4 | - | - | - | - | 0.0735–0.1745 | - | 36.3–45.2 |
| [ | Casting | Banana starch + glycerol + AV gel + different types of curcumin | 3.74–5.01 | 45.4–56.3 | - | 70, 201, 300 | - | No significant effect | 0.096–0.1404 | - | 11.8–32.9 |
| [ | Film-forming solution | Potato starch + chitosan + | - | - | - | First stage: 78–95 | - | 25.63–33.71 | - | - | - |