pp 1–15 | Cite as

Preparation and evaluation of oxygen scavenging nanocomposite films incorporating cellulose nanocrystals and Pd nanoparticles in poly(ethylene-co-vinyl alcohol)

  • Adriane Cherpinski
  • Atanu BiswasEmail author
  • Jose M. Lagaron
  • Alain Dufresne
  • Sanghoon Kim
  • Megan Buttrum
  • Eduardo Espinosa
  • H. N. ChengEmail author
Original Research


There is current interest in active packaging, where the packaging material exhibits desirable functions in addition to containment of product. One of these functions is to reduce the oxygen content in the package in order to minimize product oxidation and spoilage, and prolong product shelf-life. In this work, we have developed novel nanocomposites, comprising cellulose nanocrystals and Pd nanoparticles embedded in an ethylene–vinyl alcohol copolymer (EVOH). The nanocellulose is a critical component in the nanocomposite because it acts not only as reducing agent for PdCl2 but also as support for the dispersion of Pd nanoparticles on EVOH film and enhances the physical properties of the EVOH. Pd nanoparticles react with oxygen to serve as oxygen scavenger. The cellulose nanocrystals have also been optionally oxidized, and the increased presence of carboxyl groups favored a better distribution of the Pd nanoparticles, thereby enabling improved oxygen absorption. These features make the nanocomposites promising candidates as active packaging materials. Included in this work are the preparation and the characterization of these materials.


Active packaging Cellulose nanocrystals Ethylene–vinyl alcohol copolymer Polymer films Nanocomposite Oxygen scavenging Palladium nanoparticles 



Adriane Cherpinski would like to thank the Brazilian Council for Scientific and Technological Development (CNPq) of the Brazilian Government for supporting her stay at USDA Peoria laboratories. This study would not have been possible without the financial support of her predoctoral Grant (205955/2014-2). Eduardo Espinosa is grateful to the Spanish Ministry of Science and Education for support his research through the National Program FPU (Grant Number FPU14/02278). The authors would also like to acknowledge the funding by the MINECO project of the Spanish Government AGL2015-63855-C2-1-R. The authors acknowledge the expert technical assistance of Jason Adkins at USDA and helpful suggestions from Dr. A. D. French. Mention of trade names or commercial products in this publication is solely for the purpose of providing specific information and does not imply recommendation or endorsement by the U.S. Department of Agriculture. USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer.


  1. Arora A, Padua G (2010) Nanocomposites in food packaging. J Food Sci 75(1):R43–R49CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Arvanitoyannis I (2012) Modified atmosphere and active packaging technologies. CRC Press, Boca RatonCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Besbes I, Alila S, Boufi S (2011) Nanofibrillated cellulose from TEMPO-oxidized eucalyptus fibres: effect of the carboxyl content. Carbohydr Polym 84(3):975–983CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Biswas A, Furtado RF, Bastos MSR, Benevides SD, Oliveira MA, Boddu V, Cheng HN (2018) Preparation and characterization of carboxymethyl cellulose films with embedded essential oils. J Mater Sci Res 7:16–25CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Carbone M, Donia DT, Sabbatella G, Antiochia R (2016) Silver nanoparticles in polymeric matrices for fresh food packaging. J King Saud Univ Sci 28(4):273–279CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Chakrabarty A, Teramoto Y (2018) Recent advances in nanocellulose composites with polymers: a guide for choosing partners and how to incorporate them. Polymers 10(5):517CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Chen Y, Chen S, Wang B, Yao J, Wang H (2017) TEMPO-oxidized bacterial cellulose nanofibers-supported gold nanoparticles with superior catalytic properties. Carbohydr Polym 160:34–42CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Cheng HN, Gross RA, Smith PB (2018) Green polymer chemistry: new products, processes, and applications. In: (ACS symposium series, number 1310). American Chemical Society, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  9. Cherpinski A, Gozutok M, Sasmazel H, Torres-Giner S, Lagaron JM (2018) Electrospun oxygen scavenging films of poly (3-hydroxybutyrate) containing palladium nanoparticles for active packaging applications. Nanomaterials 8(7):469CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Cherpinski A, Szewczyk PK, Gruszczyński A, Stachewicz U, Lagaron JM (2019) Oxygen-scavenging multilayered biopapers containing palladium nanoparticles obtained by the electrospinning coating technique. Nanomaterials 9(2):262CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Choo K, Ching YC, Chuah CH, Julai S, Liou NS (2016) Preparation and characterization of polyvinyl alcohol-chitosan composite films reinforced with cellulose nanofiber. Materials 9(8):644CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Cirtiu CM, Dunlop-Briere AF, Moores A (2011) Cellulose nanocrystallites as an efficient support for nanoparticles of palladium: application for catalytic hydrogenation and Heck coupling under mild conditions. Green Chem 13(2):288–291CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. da Silva Perez D, Montanari S, Vignon MR (2003) TEMPO-mediated oxidation of cellulose III. Biomacromolecules 4(5):1417–1425CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Dainelli D, Gontard N, Spyropoulos D, Zondervan-van den Beuken E, Tobback P (2008) Active and intelligent food packaging: legal aspects and safety concerns. Trends Food Sci Technol 19:S103–S112CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Damaj Z, Joly C, Guillon E (2015) Toward new polymeric oxygen scavenging systems: formation of poly (vinyl alcohol) oxygen scavenger film. Packag Technol Sci 28(4):293–302CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Demir MM, Gulgun MA, Menceloglu YZ, Erman B, Abramchuk SS, Makhaeva EE, Khokhov AR, Matveeva VG, Sulman MG (2004) Palladium nanoparticles by electrospinning from poly (acrylonitrile-co-acrylic acid)—PdCl2 solutions. Relations between preparation conditions, particle size, and catalytic activity. Macromolecules 37(5):1787–1792CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Espinosa E, Domínguez-Robles J, Sánchez R, Tarrés Q, Rodríguez A (2017) The effect of pre-treatment on the production of lignocellulosic nanofibers and their application as a reinforcing agent in paper. Cellulose 24(6):2605–2618CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Farber JN, Harris LJ, Parish ME, Beuchat LR, Suslow TV, Gorney JR, Garrett EH, Busta FF (2003) Microbiological safety of controlled and modified atmosphere packaging of fresh and fresh-cut produce. Compr Rev Food Sci Food Saf 2:142–160CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Fortunati E, Peltzer M, Armentano I, Jiménez A, Kenny JM (2013) Combined effects of cellulose nanocrystals and silver nanoparticles on the barrier and migration properties of PLA nano-biocomposites. J Food Eng 118(1):117–124CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Fortunati E, Luzi F, Jiménez A, Gopakumar DA, Puglia D, Thomas S, Kenny JM, Chiralt A, Torre L (2016) Revalorization of sunflower stalks as novel sources of cellulose nanofibrils and nanocrystals and their effect on wheat gluten bionanocomposite properties. Carbohydr Polym 149:357–368CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Fraschini C, Chauve G, Bouchard J (2017) TEMPO-mediated surface oxidation of cellulose nanocrystals (CNCs). Cellulose 24(7):2775–2790CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. French AD (2014) Idealized powder diffraction patterns for cellulose polymorphs. Cellulose 21(2):885–896CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Gavara R, Catalá-Moragrega R, López-Carballo G, Cerisuelo JP, Domínguez I, Muriel-Galet V, Hernández-Muñoz P (2017) Use of EVOH for food packaging applications. Elsevier, Amsterdam. Google Scholar
  24. Islam M, Chen L, Sisler J, Tam K (2018) Cellulose nanocrystal (CNC)–inorganic hybrid systems: synthesis, properties and applications. J Mater Chem B 6(6):864–883CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Isogai A, Kato Y (1998) Preparation of polyuronic acid from cellulose by TEMPO-mediated oxidation. Cellulose 5(3):153–164CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Kango S, Kalia S, Celli A, Njuguna J, Habibi Y, Kumar R (2013) Surface modification of inorganic nanoparticles for development of organic–inorganic nanocomposites—a review. Prog Polym Sci 38(8):1232–1261CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Karim Z, Hakalahti M, Tammelin T, Mathew AP (2017) In situ TEMPO surface functionalization of nanocellulose membranes for enhanced adsorption of metal ions from aqueous medium. RSC Adv 7(9):5232–5241CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Kaushik M, Moores A (2016) Nanocelluloses as versatile supports for metal nanoparticles and their applications in catalysis. Green Chem 18(3):622–637CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Kundu S (2013) A new route for the formation of Au nanowires and application of shape-selective Au nanoparticles in SERS studies. J Mater Chem C 1(4):831–842CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Lagarón JM (2011) Multifunctional and nanoreinforced polymers for food packaging. In: Lagaron JM (ed) Multifunctional and nanoreinforced polymers for food packaging. Elsevier/Woodhead Publishing, Oxford, pp 1–28CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Lin N, Bruzzese CC, Dufresne A (2012) TEMPO-oxidized nanocellulose participating as crosslinking aid for alginate-based sponges. ACS Appl Mater Interf 4(9):4948–4959CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Mariano M, El Kissi N, Dufresne A (2018) Cellulose nanomaterials: size and surface influence on the thermal and rheological behavior. Polímeros 28(2):93–102CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Martínez-Sanz M, Lopez-Rubio A, Lagaron JM (2013a) Nanocomposites of ethylene vinyl alcohol copolymer with thermally resistant cellulose nanowhiskers by melt compounding (I): morphology and thermal properties. J Appl Polym Sci 128(5):2666–2678CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Martínez-Sanz M, Lopez-Rubio A, Lagaron JM (2013b) Nanocomposites of ethylene vinyl alcohol copolymer with thermally resistant cellulose nanowhiskers by melt compounding (II): water barrier and mechanical properties. J Appl Polym Sci 128(3):2197–2207Google Scholar
  35. Martins GB, Santos MRD, Rodrigues MV, Sucupira RR, Meneghetti L, Monteiro AL, Suarez PA (2017) Cellulose oxidation and the use of carboxyl cellulose metal complexes in heterogeneous catalytic systems to promote Suzuki-Miyaura coupling and CO bond formation reaction. J Braz Chem Soc 28(11):2064–2072Google Scholar
  36. Masmoudi F, Bessadok A, Dammak M, Jaziri M, Ammar E (2016) Biodegradable packaging materials conception based on starch and polylactic acid (PLA) reinforced with cellulose. Environ Sci Pollut Res 23(20):20904–20914CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Mayer A, Antonietti M (1998) Investigation of polymer-protected noble metal nanoparticles by transmission electron microscopy: control of particle morphology and shape. Coll Polym Sci 276(9):769–779CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Meng F, Wang G, Du X, Wang Z, Xu S, Zhang Y (2019) Extraction and characterization of cellulose nanofibers and nanocrystals from liquefied banana pseudo-stem residue. Compos Part B Eng 160:341–347CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Mokwena KK, Tang J (2012) Ethylene vinyl alcohol: a review of barrier properties for packaging shelf stable foods. Crit Rev Food Sci Nutr 52(7):640–650CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Montanari S, Roumani M, Heux L, Vignon MR (2005) Topochemistry of carboxylated cellulose nanocrystals resulting from TEMPO-mediated oxidation. Macromolecules 38(5):1665–1671CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Müller K, Bugnicourt E, Latorre M, Jorda M, Echegoyen-Sanz Y, Lagaron JM, Miesbauer O, Bianchin A, Hankin S, Bölz U, Pérez G, Jesdinszki M, Lindner M, Scheuerer Z, Castelló S, Schmid M (2017) Review on the processing and properties of polymer nanocomposites and nanocoatings and their applications in the packaging, automotive and solar energy fields. Nanomaterials 7(4):74CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. O’Sullivan AC (1997) Cellulose: the structure slowly unravels. Cellulose 4(3):173–207CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Puente JAS, Fatyeyeva K, Marais S, Dargent E (2015) Multifunctional hydrolyzed EVA membranes with tunable microstructure and water barrier properties. J Membr Sci 480:93–103CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Rezayat M, Blundell RK, Camp JE, Walsh DA, Thielemans W (2014) Green one-step synthesis of catalytically active palladium nanoparticles supported on cellulose nanocrystals. ACS Sustain Chem Eng 2(5):1241–1250CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Rosa MF, Chiou BS, Medeiros ES, Wood DF, Mattoso LH, Orts WJ, Imam SH (2009) Biodegradable composites based on starch/EVOH/glycerol blends and coconut fibers. J Appl Polym Sci 111(2):612–618Google Scholar
  46. Saito T, Kimura S, Nishiyama Y, Isogai A (2007) Cellulose nanofibers prepared by TEMPO-mediated oxidation of native cellulose. Biomacromolecules 8(8):2485–2491CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Segal L, Creely J, Martin A Jr, Conrad C (1959) An empirical method for estimating the degree of crystallinity of native cellulose using the X-ray diffractometer. Text Res J 29(10):786–794CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Serra A, González I, Oliver-Ortega H, Tarrès Q, Delgado-Aguilar M, Mutjé P (2017) Reducing the amount of catalyst in TEMPO-oxidized cellulose nanofibers: effect on properties and cost. Polymers 9(11):557CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Shin Y, Shin J, Lee YS (2011) Preparation and characterization of multilayer film incorporating oxygen scavenger. Macromol Res 19(9):869CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Tang Z, Li W, Lin X, Xiao H, Miao Q, Huang L, Chen L, Wu H (2017) TEMPO-oxidized cellulose with high degree of oxidation. Polymers 9(9):421CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Wang H, Zhang H, Niu B, Jiang S, Cheng J, Jiang S (2016) Structure and properties of the poly (vinyl alcohol-co-ethylene)/montmorillonite-phosphorylated soybean protein isolate barrier film. RSC Adv 6(35):29294–29302CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Wilson CL (2007) Intelligent and active packaging for fruits and vegetables. CRC Press, Boca RatonCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Wróblewska-Krepsztul J, Rydzkowski T, Borowski G, Szczypiński M, Klepka T, Thakur VK (2018) Recent progress in biodegradable polymers and nanocomposite-based packaging materials for sustainable environment. Int J Polym Anal Charact 23(4):383–395CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Wu X, Lu C, Zhang W, Yuan G, Xiong R, Zhang X (2013) A novel reagentless approach for synthesizing cellulose nanocrystal-supported palladium nanoparticles with enhanced catalytic performance. J Mater Chem A 1(30):8645–8652CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Wu X, Shi Z, Fu S, Chen J, Berry RM, Tam KC (2016) Strategy for synthesizing porous cellulose nanocrystal supported metal nanocatalysts. ACS Sustain Chem Eng 4(11):5929–5935CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Xing L, Gu J, Zhang W, Tu D, Hu C (2018) Cellulose I and II nanocrystals produced by sulfuric acid hydrolysis of Tetrapak cellulose I. Carbohydr Polym 192:184–192CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Yildirim S, Röcker B, Rüegg N, Lohwasser W (2015) Development of palladium-based oxygen scavenger: optimization of substrate and palladium layer thickness. Packag Technol Sci 28(8):710–718CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Zhang Z, Britt IJ, Tung MA (2001) Permeation of oxygen and water vapor through EVOH films as influenced by relative humidity. J Appl Polym Sci 82(8):1866–1872CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature B.V. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Novel Materials and Nanotechnology GroupIATA, CSICPaternaSpain
  2. 2.U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research ServiceNational Center for Agricultural Utilization ResearchPeoriaUSA
  3. 3.Université Grenoble Alpes, CNRS, Grenoble INP (Institute of Engineering Université Grenoble Alpes), LGP2GrenobleFrance
  4. 4.Chemical Engineering DepartmentUniversidad de CórdobaCórdobaSpain
  5. 5.U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research ServiceSouthern Regional Research CenterNew OrleansUSA

Personalised recommendations