Advertisement

Cellulose

, Volume 26, Issue 10, pp 5981–5993 | Cite as

Microfibrillated cellulose modified with urea and its reinforcement for starch-based bionanocomposites

  • Yu Tian
  • PuXin Zhu
  • Mi ZhouEmail author
  • Ronghui Guo
  • Fei Cheng
  • Yi Lin
  • Rundi Yang
Original Research
  • 72 Downloads

Abstract

The aim of this study was to improve the dispersion of microfibrillated cellulose (MFC) in starch matrix. For this, a kind of urea-modified microfibrillated cellulose (U-MFC) was prepared with microwave-aided method from MFC and urea. The introduction of the carbamate group in MFC was confirmed by Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy and nitrogen content analysis. A better one of the modified fillers, 300 WU, was prepared under conditions of microwave power 300 W for 5 min, with the degree of substitution 0.14. Starch/nanocellulose biomass films were prepared by solution casting method. The results relating the properties showed that as the 300 WU content was 4 wt%, the tensile strength of starch/300 WU nanocomposite film increased by 88.3% and 37.4%, compared with the starch film without filler and with starch/MFC composite film with the same content, respectively. Also, the thermal stability of the composite increased slightly, and the transparency of the starch/nanocellulose composite film increased when the filler addition amount was 0.5%. In view of more evenly dispersed U-MFC in starch matrix observed with scanning electron microscope, the mechanism behind the performance improvement was speculated to be that the chemical modification increases the compatibility between MFC and starch matrix.

Graphical abstract

Keywords

Biomass films Carbamate cellulose Mcrofibrillated cellulose Starch Compatibility 

Notes

Acknowledgments

We express our sincere thanks to the National Natural Science Foundation of China (No. 51603134) and the Graduate Program Construction Project Funding of Sichuan University (2017KCSJ036) for financial support.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Burrell MM (2003) Starch: the need for improved quality or quantity–an overview. J Exp Bot 54:451–456.  https://doi.org/10.1093/jxb/erg049 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Cheetham NWH, Tao L (1998) Variation in crystalline type with amylose content in maize starch granules: an X-ray powder diffraction study. Carbohyd Polym 36:277–284.  https://doi.org/10.1016/s0144-8617(98)00007-1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Cheng G, Zhou M, Wei YJ, Cheng F, Zhu PX (2019) Comparison of mechanical reinforcement effects of cellulose nanocrystal, cellulose nanofiber, and microfibrillated cellulose in starch composites. Polym Compos 40:365–372.  https://doi.org/10.1002/pc.24685 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Chivrac F, Pollet E, Dole P, Avérous L (2010) Starch-based nano-biocomposites: Plasticizer impact on the montmorillonite exfoliation process. Carbohyd Polym 79:941–947.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carbpol.2009.10.018 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Dang X, Chen H, Wang Y, Shan Z (2018) Freeze-drying of oxidized corn starch: electrochemical synthesis and characterization. Cellulose 25:2235–2247.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10570-018-1701-y CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Edgar KJ, Buchanan CM, Debenham JS, Rundquist PA, Seiler BD, Shelton MC, Tindall D (2001) Advances in cellulose ester performance and application. Prog Polym Sci 26:1605–1688.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0079-6700(01)00027-2 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Famá LM, Pettarin V, Goyanes SN, Bernal CR (2011) Starch/multi-walled carbon nanotubes composites with improved mechanical properties. Carbohyd Polym 83:1226–1231.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carbpol.2010.09.027 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Fazeli M, Keley M, Biazar E (2018) Preparation and characterization of starch-based composite films reinforced by cellulose nanofibers. Int J Biol Macroml 116:272–280.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2018.04.186 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Ferreira WH, Andrade CT (2015) Characterization of glycerol-plasticized starch and graphene oxide extruded hybrids. Ind Crop Prod 77:684–690.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indcrop.2015.09.051 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. France KJD, Hoare T, Cranston ED (2017) Review of hydrogels and aerogels containing nanocellulose. Chem Mater 29:4609–4631.  https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.chemmater.7b00531 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. French AD (2014) Idealized powder diffraction patterns for cellulose polymorphs. Cellulose 21:885–896.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10570-013-0030-4 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Fu F, Zhou J, Zhou X, Zhang L, Li D, Kondo T (2014) Green method for production of cellulose multifilament from cellulose carbamate on a pilot scale. ACS Sustain Chem Eng 2:2363–2370.  https://doi.org/10.1021/sc5003787 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Gan S, Zakaria S, Chia CH, Kaco H, Padzil FN (2014) Synthesis of kenaf cellulose carbamate using microwave irradiation for preparation of cellulose membrane. Carbohyd Polym 106:160–165.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2018.04.186 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Gan S, Zakaria S, Chia CH, Chen RS, Jeyalaldeen N (2015) Physico-mechanical properties of a microwave-irradiated kenaf carbamate/graphene oxide membrane. Cellulose 22:3851–3863.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10570-015-0749-1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Guo Y, Zhou J, Song Y, Zhang L (2010a) An efficient and environmentally friendly method for the synthesis of cellulose carbamate by microwave heating. Macromol Rapid Comm 30:1504–1508.  https://doi.org/10.1002/marc.200900238 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Guo Y, Zhou J, Wang Y, Zhang L, Lin X (2010b) An efficient transformation of cellulose into cellulose carbamates assisted by microwave irradiation. Cellulose 17:1115–1125.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10570-010-9446-2 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Hietala M, Mathew AP, Oksman K (2013) Bionanocomposites of thermoplastic starch and cellulose nanofibers manufactured using twin-screw extrusion. Eur Polym J 49:950–956.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eurpolymj.2012.10.016 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Hoover R, Hughes T, Chung HJ, Liu Q (2010) Composition, molecular structure, properties, and modification of pulse starches: a review. Food Res Int 43:399–413.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodres.2009.09.00 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Imberty A, Perez S (1988) A revisit to the three-dimensional structure of B-type starch. Biopolymer 27:1205–1221.  https://doi.org/10.1002/bip.360270803 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Jost V, Stramm C (2015) Influence of plasticizers on the mechanical and barrier properties of cast biopolymer films. J Appl Polym Sci 133:42513(1)–42513(9).  https://doi.org/10.1002/app.42513 Google Scholar
  21. Kampeerapappun P, Aht-Ong D, Pentrakoon D, Srikulkit K (2007) Preparation of cassava starch/montmorillonite composite film. Carbohyd Polym 67:155–163.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carbpol.2006.05.012 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Khalil HPSA, Bhat AH, Yusra AFI (2012) Green composites from sustainable cellulose nanofibrils: a review. Carbohyd Polym 87:963–979.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carbpol.2011.08.078 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Kim JH, Kim HR, Choi SJ, Park CS, Moon TW (2016) Production of an in vitro low-digestible starch via hydrothermal treatment of amylosucrase-modified normal and waxy rice starches and its structural properties. J Agric Food Chem 64:5045–5052.  https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jafc.6b01055 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Labafzadeh SR, Vyavaharkar K, Kavakka JS, King AW, Kilpelainen I (2015) Amination and thiolation of chloroacetyl cellulose through reactive dissolution in N, N-dimethylformamide. Carbohyd Polym 116:60–66.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carbpol.2014.03.077 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Li R, Liu C, Ma J (2011) Studies on the properties of graphene oxide-reinforced starch biocomposites. Carbohyd Polym 84:631–637.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carbpol.2010.12.04 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Li W, Li C, Gu Z, Qiu Y, Cheng L, Hong Y, Li Z (2016) Relationship between structure and retrogradation properties of corn starch treated with 1,4-α-glucan branching enzyme. Food Hydrocolloid 52:868–875.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodhyd.2015.09.009 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Ling Z, Wang T, Makarem M, Cintrón, Cheng HN, Kang X, Bacher M, Potthast A, Rosenau T, King H, Delhom CD, Nam S, Edwards JV, Kim SH, Xu F, French AD (2019) Effects of ball milling on the structure of cotton cellulose. Cellulose 26:305–328.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10570-018-02230-x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Liu D, Zhong T, Chang PR, Li K, Wu Q (2010) Starch composites reinforced by bamboo cellulosic crystals. Bioresour Technol 101:2529–2536.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2009.11.058 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. López OV, Ninago MD, Lencina MMS, García MA, Andreucetti NA, Ciolino AE, Villar MA (2015) Thermoplastic starch plasticized with alginate–glycerol mixtures: melt-processing evaluation and film properties. Carbohyd Polym 126:83–90.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carbpol.2015.03.030 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Loubes MA, Resio ANC, Tolaba MP, Suarez C (2012) Mechanical and thermal characteristics of amaranth starch isolated by acid wet-milling procedure. LWT - Food Sci Technol 46:519–524.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lwt.2011.11.015 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Ma X, Yu J, Kennedy JF (2005) Studies on the properties of natural fibers-reinforced thermoplastic starch composites. Carbohyd Polym 62:19–24.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carbpol.2005.07.015 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Ma T, Chang PR, Zheng P, Ma X (2013) The composites based on plasticized starch and graphene oxide/reduced graphene oxide. Carbohydr Polym 94:63–70.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carbpol.2013.01.007 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Malmir S, Montero B, Rico M, Barral L, Bouza R (2016) Morphology, thermal and barrier properties of biodegradable films of poly (3-hydroxybutyrate-co-3-hydroxyvalerate) containing cellulose nanocrystals. Compos Part A-Appl S 93:41–48.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compositesa.2016.11.011 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Mansikkamäki P, Lahtinen M, Rissanen K (2005) Structural changes of cellulose crystallites induced by mercerisation in different solvent systems; determined by powder X-ray diffraction method. Cellulose 12:233–242.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10570-004-3132-1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Mbey JA, Hoppe S, Thomas F (2012) Cassava starch–kaolinite composite film. Effect of clay content and clay modification on film properties. Carbohyd Polym 88:213–222.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carbpol.2011.11.091 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Miao C, Hamad WY (2013) Cellulose reinforced polymer composites and nanocomposites: a critical review. Cellulose 20:2221–2262.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10570-013-0007-3 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Mittal G, Rhee KY, Mišković-Stanković V, Hui D (2018) Reinforcements in multi-scale polymer composites: processing, properties, and applications. Compos Part B-Eng 138:122–139.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compositesb.2017.11.028 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Myllärinen P, Buleon A, Lahtinen R, Forssell P (2002) The crystallinity of amylose and amylopectin films. Carbohyd Polym 48:41–48.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compositesb.2017.11.028 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Nam S, French AD, Condon BD, Concha M (2016) Segal crystallinity index revisited by the simulation of X-ray diffraction patterns of cotton cellulose I and cellulose II. Carbohyd Polym 135:1–9.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carbpol.2015.08.035 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Patil NV, Netravali AN (2016) Microfibrillated cellulose-reinforced nonedible starch-based thermoset biocomposites. J Appl Polym Sci 133:43803(1)–43803(9).  https://doi.org/10.1002/app.43803 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Peng XW, Ren JL, Zhong LX, Sun RC (2011) Nanocomposite films based on xylan-rich hemicelluloses and cellulose nanofibers with enhanced mechanical properties. Biomacromolecule 12:3321–3329.  https://doi.org/10.1021/bm2008795 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Prachayawarakorn J, Sangnitidej P, Boonpasith P (2010) Properties of thermoplastic rice starch composites reinforced by cotton fiber or low-density polyethylene. Carbohyd Polym 81:425–433.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carbpol.2010.02.041 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Qin Y, Zhang S, Yu J, Yang J, Xiong L, Sun Q (2016) Effects of chitin nano-whiskers on the antibacterial and physicochemical properties of maize starch films. Carbohydr Polym 147:372–378.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carbpol.2016.03.095 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Song YH, Zeng LB, Zheng Q (2017) Understanding the reinforcement and dissipation of natural rubber compounds filled with hybrid filler composed of carbon black and silica. Chin J Polym Sci 35:1436–1446.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10118-017-1987-5 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Syafri E, Kasim A, Asben A, Senthamaraikannan P, Sanjay MR (2018) Studies on Ramie cellulose microfibrils reinforced cassava starch composite: influence of microfibrils loading. J Nat Fibers.  https://doi.org/10.1080/15440478.2018.1470057 Google Scholar
  46. Vo LTT, Hajji F, Široká B, Manian AP, Bechtold T (2010) Functionalisation of cellulosic substrates by a facile solventless method of introducing carbamate groups. Carbohyd Polym 82:1191–1197.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carbpol.2010.06.052 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Vo LTT, Hajji F, Široká B, Manian AP, Davis A, Foster TJ, Bechtold T (2014) Direct carbamation of cellulose fiber sheets. Cellulose 21:627–640.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10570-013-0116-z CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Wang K, Wang W, Ye R, Liu A, Xiao J, Liu Y, Zhao Y (2017a) Mechanical properties and solubility in water of corn starch-collagen composite films: effect of starch type and concentrations. Food Chem 216:209–216.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodchem.2016.08.048 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Wang W, Wang K, Xiao J, Liu Y, Zhao Y, Liu A (2017b) Performance of high amylose starch-composited gelatin films influenced by gelatinization and concentration. Int J Biol Macromol 94:258–265.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2016.10.014 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Willberg-Keyriläinen P, Hiltunen J, Ropponen J (2017) Production of cellulose carbamate using urea-based deep eutectic solvents. Cellulose 25:195–204.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10570-017-1465-9 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Wilpiszewska K, Spychaj T (2011) Ionic liquids: media for starch dissolution, plasticization and modification. Carbohyd Polym 86:424–428.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carbpol.2011.06.001 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Wong KJ, Zahi S, Low KO, Lim CC (2010) Fracture characterisation of short bamboo fibre reinforced polyester composites. Mater Design 31:4147–4154.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2010.04.029 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Wu D, Chang PR, Ma X (2011) Preparation and properties of layered double hydroxide–carboxymethylcellulose sodium/glycerol plasticized starch nanocomposites. Carbohyd Polym 86:877–882.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carbpol.2011.05.030 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Xiaofei M, Jiugao Y, Jin F (2004) Urea and formamide as a mixed plasticizer for thermoplastic starch. Polym Int 53:1780–1785.  https://doi.org/10.1002/app.20628 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Yao X, Qi X, He Y, Tan D, Chen F, Fu Q (2014) Simultaneous reinforcing and toughening of polyurethane via grafting on the surface of microfibrillated cellulose. ACS Appl Mater Inte 6:2497.  https://doi.org/10.1021/am4056694 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Yin Y, Ma J, Tian X, Jiang X, Wang H, Gao W (2018) Cellulose nanocrystals functionalized with amino-silane and epoxy-poly(ethylene glycol) for reinforcement and flexibilization of poly(lactic acid): material preparation and compatibility mechanism. Cellulose 25:6447–6463.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10570-018-2033-7 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Yu G, Teng Y, Lai W, Yin C (2016) The preparation and study of cellulose carbamates and their regenerated membranes. Int J Biol Macromol 93:1155–1160.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2016.09.081 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Zdanowicz M, Johansson C (2016) Mechanical and barrier properties of starch-based films plasticized with two- or three component deep eutectic solvents. Carbohyd Polym 151:103–112.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carbpol.2016.05.061 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Zhang B, Bai B, Pan Y, Li XM, Cheng JS, Chen HQ (2018) Effects of pectin with different molecular weight on gelatinization behavior, textural properties, retrogradation and in vitro digestibility of corn starch. Food Chem.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodchem.2018.05.011 Google Scholar
  60. Zhao X, Zhang Q, Chen D, Lu P (2010) Enhanced mechanical properties of graphene-based poly(vinyl alcohol) composites. Macromolecules 43:2357–2363.  https://doi.org/10.1021/ma902862u CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Zhou M, Shi L, Cheng F, Lin Y, Zhu PX (2018) High-efficient preparation of carboxymethyl starch via ball milling with limited solvent content. Starch-Stärke 70:1700250(1)–1700250(7).  https://doi.org/10.1002/star.201700250 CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature B.V. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Textile Institute, College of Light Industry, Textile and Food EngineeringSichuan UniversityChengduChina
  2. 2.Department of Mechanical EngineeringShanghai Jiao Tong UniversityShanghaiChina

Personalised recommendations