Journal of Polymers and the Environment

, Volume 27, Issue 12, pp 2963–2973 | Cite as

A Simple Approach for the Synthesis of Cellulose Nanofiber Reinforced Chitosan/PVP Bio Nanocomposite Film for Packaging

  • Ritesh Kumar
  • Bhuvneshwar Rai
  • Gulshan KumarEmail author
Original paper


The development of chitosan-based food packaging film has been increasing due to its wider availability, biodegradability, low-cost, and renewability. The purpose of this study was to develop cellulose nanofibers (CNFs) reinforced Chitosan/PVP(CHP) green bio nanocomposite film by solvent casting method with enhanced barrier and mechanical property. CNFs of dimension 9–11 nm and 100–200 nm were extracted from jute fibers by directly treating it with HNO3–NaNO2 mixture. Bio nanocomposite films were synthesized with various concentrations of CNFs and evaluated using SEM, TGA/DTG and XRD to analyze the morphology, thermal behavior and crystallinity of bio nanocomposite films. SEM analysis revealed the uniform dispersion of CNFs in CHP matrix. Thermal stability of prepared bio nanocomposite films was improved with the loading of 5 wt% of cellulose nanofibers. ATR(FT-IR) spectra shows physical interaction between all the components of bio nanocomposite film. The bio nanocomposite films were also characterized for physical property like thickness, mechanical testing and barrier properties. The addition of CNFs significantly enhanced the mechanical property of bio nanocomposite films. Furthermore, water and oxygen transmission rate of bio nanocomposite film decreased with the increase in CNFs concentration. Overall the performed studies confirmed, the use of CNFs in polymer matrix makes it possible to produce a flexible, transparent, thermally stable bio nanocomposite film with enhanced mechanical and barrier properties for food packaging applications.


Jute fiber Cellulose nanofibers Bio nanocomposite film Food packaging 



One of the authors Ritesh Kumar, is grateful to GGSIP University, New Delhi for providing financial assistance in the form of Indraprastha Research Fellowship (IPRF) vide letter no. GGSIPU/DRC/Ph.D./2018/1220. We would also like to thank the lab staff of BTL-311 (USBAS) for their invaluable support and guidance to make this research successful. The authors would also like to thank All India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS) for TEM facility and Prof. B.R Mehta (TFL, Indian Institute of technology, New Delhi) to provide characterization facility during course of investigation.

Compliance With Ethical Standards

Conflict of interest

There are no conflicts of interest.


  1. 1.
    Wang H, Qian J, Ding F (2018) J Agric Food Chem 66:395–413PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Johar N, Ahmad I, Dufresne A (2012) Ind Crops Prod 37:93–99Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Gopi S, Amalraj A, Jacob J, Kalarikkal N, Thomas S, Guo Q (2018) New J Chem 42:5117–5127Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Gopi S, Amalraj A, Kalarikkal N, Zhang J, Thomas S, Guo Q (2018) Mater Sci Eng C 97:723–729Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Jacob J, Haponiuk JT, Thomas S, Peter G, Gopi S (2018) Fibers 6:79–90Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Amalraj A, Jude S, Varma K, Jacob J, Gopi S, Oluwafemi SO, Thomas S (2017) Mater Sci Eng C 75:359–367Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Nascimento P, Marim R, Carvalho G, Mali S (2016) Mater Res 19:167–174Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Malini M, Thirumavalavan M, Yang W, Lee J, Annadurai G (2015) A versatile chitosan / ZnO nanocomposite with enhanced antimicrobial properties. Int J Biol Macromol 80:121–129PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Cheng Z, Teoh SH (2004) Biomaterials 25:1991–2001PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Kargarzadeh H et al (2018) Prog Polym Sci 87:197–227Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Rhim JW, Ng Perry KW (2007) Crit Rev Food Sci Nutr 47:411–433PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Jacob J, Haponiuk JT, Thomas S, Gopi S (2018) Mater Today Chem 9:43–55Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Jacob J, Peter G, Thomas S, Haponiuk JT, Gopi S (2019) Int J Biol Macromol 129:370–376PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Gopi S, Amalraj A, Jude S, Thomas S, Guo Q (2019) J Taiwan Inst Chem Eng 96:664–671Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Hossain MS, Iqbal A (2014) J Bangladesh Agril Univ 12:153–160Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Lin S, Chen L, Huang L, Cao S, Luo X, Liu K (2015) Ind Crops Prod 70:395–403Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Thakur VK, Voicu SI (2016) Carbohydr Polym 146:148–165PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Lewandowska K, Sionkowska A, Kaczmarek B, Furtos G (2014) Mol Cryst Liq Cryst 590:193–198Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Alver E, Metin A, Çiftçi H (2014) J Inorg Organomet Polym Mater 24:1048–1054Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Basha SKS, Rao MC (2018) Polym. Bull 75:3641–3666Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Yeh JT, Chen CL, Huang KS, Nien YH, Chen JL, Huang PZ (2006) J Appl Polym Sci 101:885–891Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Poonguzhali R, Basha SK, Kumari VS (2018) Int J Biol Macromol 112:1300–1309PubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Li J, Zivanovic S, Davidson PM, Kit K (2010) Carbohydr Polym 79:786–791Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Neves MA (2016) Food Sci. 2:1–7Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Zhu H et al (2012) Desalination 286:41–48Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Chirayi CJ, Mathew L, Thomas S (2014) Rev Adv Mater. Sci 37:20–28Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Sumaiyah B, Wirjosentono K, Nasution MP, Gea S (2014) Int J PharmTech Res 6:814–820Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Gopi S, Amalraj A, Varma K, Jude S, Reddy PB, Divya C, Haponiuk JT, Thomas S (2018) Int J Polym Mater Polym Biomater 67:581–588Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Gopi S, Amalraj A, Jude S, Benson KT, Balakrishnan P, Haponiuk JT, Thomas S (2019) J Macromol Sci Part A 56:327–340Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Gopi S, Amalraj A, Jude S, Varma K, Sreeraj TR, Haponiuk JT, Thomas S (2017) Mater Sci Eng C 81:20–31Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    EI-Miri N et al. (2015) Carbohydr Polym 129:156–167Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Dehnad D, Mirzaei H, Emam-djomeh Z, Jafari S (2014) Carbohydr Polym 109:148–154PubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Tibolla H, Pelissari FM, Martins JT, Vicente AA, Menegalli FC (2018) Food Hydrocoll 75:192–201Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Soni B, Barbary E, Schilling MW, Mahmoud B (2016) Carbohydr Polym 151:779–789PubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Sharma PR, Joshi R, Sharma SK, Hsiao BS (2017) Biomacromol 18:2333–2342Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Kumar R, Kumari S, Surah SS , Rai B, Kumar R, Sirohi S, Kumar G (2019) Mater Res Express 6:105601Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    EI-Hefian EA, Nasef MM, Yahaya AH (2012) J Chem 9: 1431–1439Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Hasan A, Waibhaw G, Tiwari S, Dharmalingam K, Shukla I, Pandey LM (2017) J Biomed Mater Res Part A 105:2391–2404Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Poonguzhali R, Basha SK, Kumari VS (2018) Polym Plast Technol Eng 57:1400–1410Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Huang L et al (2018) AIP Adv 8:025116Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Poonguzhali R, Basha SK, Kumari VS (2017) Int J Biol Macromol 105:111–120PubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Samzadeh-kermani A, Esfandiary N (2016) Adv Nanopart 5:18–26Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Devi MP, Sastry TP, Meignanalakshmi S (2012) J Pharm 2:21–32Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University School of Basic and Applied SciencesGuru Gobind Singh Indraprastha UniversityNew DelhiIndia
  2. 2.Material Science DivisionShriram Institute for Industrial ResearchNew DelhiIndia

Personalised recommendations