, Volume 25, Issue 2, pp 1291–1307 | Cite as

Improving the water resistance of nanocellulose-based films with polyhydroxyalkanoates processed by the electrospinning coating technique

  • Adriane Cherpinski
  • Sergio Torres-Giner
  • Jari Vartiainen
  • Maria Soledad Peresin
  • Panu Lahtinen
  • Jose M. Lagaron
Original Paper


Polyhydroxyalkanoates (PHAs) comprise a family of biodegradable aliphatic polyesters with enhanced sustainable profile and high water vapor barrier. As environmentally friendly materials, nanostructured cellulose-based films, also called nanopapers, such as films made of cellulose nanofibrils (CNFs) and lignocellulose nanofibrils (LCNFs), are also of growing interest due to their high mechanical strength and outstanding oxygen barrier properties at dry conditions. Unfortunately, nanopapers are highly hydrophilic, lacking of sufficient moisture resistance for uses in, for instance, food packaging. The present study reports, for the first time, on the effect of electrospun poly(3-hydroxybutyrate) (PHB) and poly(3-hydroxybutyrate-co-3-hydroxyvalerate) (PHBV) double side coatings on the morphology, water contact angle, mechanical properties, and barrier performance of CNF and LCNF films. The resultant multilayer structures showed significantly improved water contact resistance, more balanced mechanical properties, and higher barrier performance against water vapor in comparison to the neat nanopapers. Although the PHA-coated nanopapers presented slightly lower aroma barrier due to the intrinsic affinity of PHA for limonene uptake, these sustainable multilayer films further improved the oxygen performance of the nanopapers, showing significant potential as barrier materials even at high humidity conditions. As a result, the here-developed novel films, based on nanopapers double side coated with electrospun PHB and PHBV layers, appear as a very promising fully bio-based material concept for food packaging applications due to their outstanding water vapor and oxygen barrier performance.


PHB PHBV Nanopaper Nanocellulose Electrospinning Barrier packaging 



The authors would like to thank the Spanish Ministry of Economy and Competitiveness (MINECO) project AGL2015-63855-C2-1-R for financial support. Adriane Cherpinski also acknowledges the European Cooperation in Science and Technology (COST) Action FP1405 for funding through a Short Term Scientific Mission (STSM) and the Brazilian Council for Scientific and Technological Development (CNPq) of the Brasilian Government for her predoctoral scholarship (205955/2014-2).


  1. Anderson AJ, Dawes EA (1990) Occurrence, metabolism, metabolic role, and industrial uses of bacterial polyhydroxyalkanoates. Microbiol Rev 54:450–472Google Scholar
  2. Aulin C, Gällstedt M, Lindström T (2010) Oxygen and oil barrier properties of microfibrillated cellulose films and coatings. Cellulose 17:559–574CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Avella M, Martuscelli E, Raimo M (2000) Review Properties of blends and composites based on poly(3-hydroxy)butyrate (PHB) and poly(3-hydroxybutyrate-hydroxyvalerate) (PHBV) copolymers. J Mater Sci 35:523–545CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Babu RP, O’Connor K, Seeram R (2013) Current progress on bio-based polymers and their future trends. Prog Biomater 2:8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Barhoum A, Samyn P, Öhlund T, Dufresne A (2017) Review of recent research on flexible multifunctional nanopapers. Nanoscale 9:15181–15205CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Busolo MA, Torres-Giner S, Lagaron JM (2009) Enhancing the gas barrier properties of polylactic acid by means of electrospun ultrathin zein fibers. In: Annual Technical Conference—ANTEC, Conference Proceedings, pp 2763–2767Google Scholar
  7. Castro-Mayorga JL, Fabra MJ, Cabedo L, Lagaron JM (2017) On the use of the electrospinning coating technique to produce antimicrobial polyhydroxyalkanoate materials containing in situ-stabilized silver nanoparticles. Nanomaterials 7:4CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Cherpinski A, Torres-Giner S, Cabedo L, Lagaron JM (2017a) Post-processing optimization of electrospun submicron poly(3-hydroxybutyrate) fibers to obtain continuous films of interest in food packaging applications. Food Addit Contam Part A 34:1817–1830CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Cherpinski A, Torres-Giner S, Cabedo L, Méndez JA, Lagaron JM (2017b) Multilayer structures based on annealed electrospun biopolymer coatings of interest in water and aroma barrier fiber-based food packaging applications. J Appl Polym Sci. Google Scholar
  10. Dufresne A (2012) Natural polymers: volume 2 nanocomposites. The Royal Society of Chemistry, LondonGoogle Scholar
  11. Echegoyen Y, Fabra MJ, Castro Mayorga JL, Cherpinski A, Lagaron JM (2017) High throughput electro-hydrodynamic processing in food encapsulation and food packaging applications: viewpoint. Trends Food Sci Technol 60:71–79CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Fabra MJ, Lopez-Rubio A, Lagaron JM (2013) High barrier polyhydroxyalcanoate food packaging film by means of nanostructured electrospun interlayers of zein. Food Hydrocoll 32:106–114CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Ferrer A et al (2012) Effect of residual lignin and heteropolysaccharides in nanofibrillar cellulose and nanopaper from wood fibers. Cellulose 19:2179–2193CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Galván MV, Mocchiutti P, Cornaglia LM, Zanuttini MA (2012) Dual-polyelectrolyte adsorption of poly(allylamine hydrochloride) and xylan onto recycled unbleached kraft pulps. BioResources 7:2075–2089CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. González I, Alcalà M, Chinga-Carrasco G, Vilaseca F, Boufi S, Mutjé P (2014) From paper to nanopaper: evolution of mechanical and physical properties. Cellulose 21:2599–2609CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Henriksson M, Berglund LA, Isaksson P, Lindström T, Nishino T (2008) Cellulose nanopaper structures of high toughness. Biomacromolecules 9:1579–1585CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Kadla JF, Gilbert RD (2000) Cellulose structure: a review. Cellul Chem Technol 34:197–216Google Scholar
  18. Kang IK, Choi SH, Shin DS, Yoon SC (2001) Surface modification of polyhydroxyalkanoate films and their interaction with human fibroblasts. Int J Biol Macromol 28:205–212CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Kim J-H et al (2015) Review of nanocellulose for sustainable future materials. Int J Precis Eng Manuf Green Technol 2:197–213CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Krochta JM, Baldwin EA, Nisperos-Carriedo MO (1994) Edible coatings and films to improve food quality. Technomic Publishing Co Inc, LancasterGoogle Scholar
  21. Lagaron JM (ed) (2011) Multifunctional and nanoreinforced polymers for food packaging. In: Multifunctional and nanoreinforced polymers for food packaging. Woodhead Publishing Limited, Cambridge, pp 1–28Google Scholar
  22. Lagaron JM, Catalá R, Gavara R (2004) Structural characteristics defining high barrier properties in polymeric materials. Mater Sci Technol 20:1–7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Lavoine N, Desloges I, Dufresne A, Bras J (2012) Microfibrillated cellulose—its barrier properties and applications in cellulosic materials: a review. Carbohydr Polym 90:735–764CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Martínez-Abad A, Cabedo L, Oliveira CSS, Hilliou L, Reis M, Lagarón JM (2016) Characterization of polyhydroxyalkanoate blends incorporating unpurified biosustainably produced poly(3-hydroxybutyrate-co-3-hydroxyvalerate). J Appl Polym Sci. Google Scholar
  25. Moon RJ, Martini A, Nairn J, Simonsen J, Youngblood J (2011) Cellulose nanomaterials review: structure, properties and nanocomposites. Chem Soc Rev 40:3941–3994CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Nair SS, Yan N (2015) Effect of high residual lignin on the thermal stability of nanofibrils and its enhanced mechanical performance in aqueous environments. Cellulose 22:3137–3150CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Österberg M, Vartiainen J, Lucenius J, Hippi U, Seppälä J, Serimaa R, Laine J (2013) A fast method to produce strong NFC films as a platform for barrier and functional materials. ACS Appl Mater Interfaces 5:4640–4647CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Quiles-Carrillo L, Montanes N, Boronat T, Balart R, Torres-Giner S (2017) Evaluation of the engineering performance of different bio-based aliphatic homopolyamide tubes prepared by profile extrusion. Polym Test 61:421–429CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Reinsch VE, Kelley SS (1997) Crystallization of poly(hydroxybutrate-co-hydroxyvalerate) in wood fiber-reinforced composites. J Appl Polym Sci 64:1785–1796CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Rodionova G, Lenes M, Eriksen Ø, Gregersen Ø (2011) Surface chemical modification of microfibrillated cellulose: improvement of barrier properties for packaging applications. Cellulose 18:127–134CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Rojo E, Peresin MS, Sampson WW, Hoeger IC, Vartiainen J, Laine J, Rojas OJ (2015) Comprehensive elucidation of the effect of residual lignin on the physical, barrier, mechanical and surface properties of nanocellulose films. Green Chem 17:1853–1866CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Sanchez-Garcia MD, Gimenez E, Lagaron JM (2007) Novel PET nanocomposites of interest in food packaging applications and comparative barrier performance with biopolyester nanocomposites. J Plast Film Sheeting 23:133–148CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Sanchez-Garcia MD, Gimenez E, Lagaron JM (2008) Morphology and barrier properties of solvent cast composites of thermoplastic biopolymers and purified cellulose fibers. Carbohydr Polym 71:235–244CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Savenkova L, Gercberga Z, Nikolaeva V, Dzene A, Bibers I, Kalnin M (2000) Mechanical properties and biodegradation characteristics of PHB-based films. Process Biochem 35:573–579CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Sehaqui H, Liu A, Zhou Q, Berglund LA (2010) Fast preparation procedure for large, flat cellulose and cellulose/inorganic nanopaper structures. Biomacromol 11:2195–2198CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Sixta H (2006) Handbook of pulp. Wiley, WeinheimCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Solala I et al (2011) Mechanoradical formation and its effects on birch kraft pulp during the preparation of nanofibrillated cellulose with Masuko refining. Holzforschung 66:477–483Google Scholar
  38. Spence KL, Venditti RA, Habibi Y, Rojas OJ, Pawlak JJ (2010a) The effect of chemical composition on microfibrillar cellulose films from wood pulps: mechanical processing and physical properties. Bioresour Technol 101:5961–5968CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Spence KL, Venditti RA, Rojas OJ, Habibi Y, Pawlak JJ (2010b) The effect of chemical composition on microfibrillar cellulose films from wood pulps: water interactions and physical properties for packaging applications. Cellulose 17:835–848CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Syverud K, Stenius P (2008) Strength and barrier properties of MFC films. Cellulose 16:75CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Tammelin T, Hippi U, Salminen A (2013) Method for the preparation of NFC films on supports. WO 2013060934 A2Google Scholar
  42. Thellen C, Cheney S, Ratto JA (2013) Melt processing and characterization of polyvinyl alcohol and polyhydroxyalkanoate multilayer films. J Appl Polym Sci 127:2314–2324CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Torres-Giner S (2011) Electrospun nanofibers for food packaging applications. In: Lagaron JM (ed) Multifunctional and nanoreinforced polymers for food packaging. Woodhead Publishing Limited, Cambridge, pp 108–125CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Torres-Giner S, Montanes N, Boronat T, Quiles-Carrillo L, Balart R (2016a) Melt grafting of sepiolite nanoclay onto poly(3-hydroxybutyrate-co-4-hydroxybutyrate) by reactive extrusion with multi-functional epoxy-based styrene-acrylic oligomer. Eur Polym J 84:693–707CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Torres-Giner S, Montanes N, Fombuena V, Boronat T, Sanchez-Nacher L (2016b) Preparation and characterization of compression-molded green composite sheets made of poly(3-hydroxybutyrate) reinforced with long pita fibers. Adv Polym Technol. Google Scholar
  46. Torres-Giner S, Pérez-Masiá R, Lagaron JM (2016c) A review on electrospun polymer nanostructures as advanced bioactive platforms. Polym Eng Sci 56:500–527CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Torres-Giner S, Torres A, Ferrándiz M, Fombuena V, Balart R (2017) Antimicrobial activity of metal cation-exchanged zeolites and their evaluation on injection-molded pieces of bio-based high-density polyethylene. J Food Saf 37:e12348CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Vähä-Nissi M et al (2017) Cellulose nanofibrils in biobased multilayer films for food packaging. J Appl Polym Sci. Google Scholar
  49. Vartiainen J et al (2011) Health and environmental safety aspects of friction grinding and spray drying of microfibrillated cellulose. Cellulose 18:775–786CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Vartiainen J, Vähä-Nissi M, Harlin A (2014) Biopolymer films and coatings in packaging applications—a review of recent developments. Mater Sci Appl 5:708–718Google Scholar
  51. Vartiainen J, Pelto J, Kaljunen T, Kenttä E (2016a) Hydrophobization of cellophane and cellulose nano-fibrils films by supercritical state carbon dioxide impregnation with walnut oil. Nord Pulp Pap Res J 31:541–547CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Vartiainen J, Shen Y, Kaljunen T, Malm T, Vähä-Nissi M, Putkonen M, Harlin A (2016b) Bio-based multilayer barrier films by extrusion, dispersion coating and atomic layer deposition. J Appl Polym Sci. Google Scholar
  53. Vikman M, Vartiainen J, Tsitko I, Korhonen P (2015) Biodegradability and compostability of nanofibrillar cellulose-based products. J Polym Environ 23:206–215CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Wågberg L, Decher G, Norgren M, Lindström T, Ankerfors M, Axnäs K (2008) The build-up of polyelectrolyte multilayers of microfibrillated cellulose and cationic polyelectrolytes. Langmuir 24:784–795CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Wei L, McDonald AG (2016) A review on grafting of biofibers for biocomposites. Materials 9:303CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V., part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Adriane Cherpinski
    • 1
  • Sergio Torres-Giner
    • 1
  • Jari Vartiainen
    • 2
  • Maria Soledad Peresin
    • 2
    • 3
  • Panu Lahtinen
    • 2
  • Jose M. Lagaron
    • 1
  1. 1.Novel Materials and Nanotechnology Group, Institute of Agrochemistry and Food Technology (IATA)Spanish Council for Scientific Research (CSIC)PaternaSpain
  2. 2.VTT Technical Research Centre of Finland LtdEspooFinland
  3. 3.Forest Products Development Center, School of Forestry and Wildlife SciencesAuburn UniversityAuburnUSA

Personalised recommendations