Advertisement

Synthesis of Bio-based Polymer Composites: Fabrication, Fillers, Properties, and Challenges

  • Amanda Murawski
  • Rashid Diaz
  • Sarah Inglesby
  • Khristal Delabar
  • Rafael L. QuirinoEmail author
Chapter
Part of the Lecture Notes in Bioengineering book series (LNBE)

Abstract

The bio-based polymer composite industry is growing dramatically following economic and environmental concerns over constant use and dependence on non-renewable feedstock, such as crude oil. It is notorious that there has been a continuous increase in the research activity related to the development of novel bio-based materials over the past couple of decades. The focus has slowly shifted from simpler systems, consisting primarily of traditional thermoplastics reinforced with natural fibers, to more advanced composites with carefully engineered bio-based matrices, or fully bio-based materials in which both matrix and reinforcement are of bio-based origins. In the realm of bio-based biomedical applications, the efforts are vastly dominated by investigation of PLA and PLA-based composites. The existing challenges for the fabrication and the use of bio-based composites are mainly associated with the lack of consistency in materials’ characterization among the various proposed systems, which makes a direct comparison of different materials exceedingly hard. This manuscript contemplates the fabrication of bio-based composites through a processing perspective, and by also covering the literature of the many resin/reinforcement systems investigated to date, before concluding with brief remarks on the desired properties and challenges related to the use of bio-based composites in biomedical applications.

Keywords

Polymer composites Bio-based materials Natural fibers Reinforcement Bio-based resins 

References

  1. Agrawal R, Saxena N, Sreekala M, Thomas S (2000) Effect of treatment on the thermal conductivity and thermal diffusivity of oil-palm-fiber-reinforced phenolformaldehyde composites. J Polym Sci, Part B: Polym Phys 38:916–921Google Scholar
  2. Aji IS, Sapuan SM, Zainuddin ES, Abdan K (2009) Kenaf fibres as reinforcement for polymeric composite: a review. Int Jo Mech Mater Eng 4(3):239–248Google Scholar
  3. Alghazali KM, Nima ZA, Hamzah RN, Dhar MS, Anderson DE, Biris AS (2015) Bone-tissue engineering: complex tunable structural and biological responses to injury, drug delivery, and cell-based therapies. Drug Metab Rev 47(4):431–454Google Scholar
  4. Al-Hassan AA, Norziah MH (2012) Starch–gelatin edible films: water vaporpermeability and mechanical properties as affected by plasticizers. Food Hydrocolloids 26(1):108–117Google Scholar
  5. Aranaz I, Gutierrez MC, Ferrer ML, Monte F (2014) Preparation of chitosan nanocomposites with a macroporous structure by unidirectional freezing and subsequent freeze-drying. Marine Drugs 12(11):5619–5642Google Scholar
  6. Babu RP, Oconnor K, Seeram R (2013) Current progress on bio-based polymers and their future trends. Prog Biomater 2(1):8Google Scholar
  7. Baley C, Busnel F, Grohens Y, Sire O (2006) Influence of chemical treatments on surface properties and adhesion of flax fibre polyester resin. Compos A Appl Sci Manuf 37:1626–1637Google Scholar
  8. Bisio A, Xanathos M (1995) How to manage plastics waste: technology and market opportunities. Hanser Pub Inc., New YorkGoogle Scholar
  9. Bognitzki M, Czad W, Frese T, Schaper A, Hellwig M, Steinhart M, Greiner A, Wendorff JH (2001) Nano-structured fibers via electrospinning. Adv Mater 13:70–72Google Scholar
  10. Bonnet F, Stoffelbach F, Fontaine G, Bourbigot S (2015) Continuous cyclo-polymerisation of L-lactide by reactive extrusion using atoxic metal-based catalysts: Easy access to well-defined polylactide macrocycles. RSC Adv 5:31303–31310Google Scholar
  11. Carlborn K, Matuana LM (2006) Functionalization of wood particles through a reactive extrusion process. J Appl Polym Sci 101(5):3131–3142Google Scholar
  12. Chen MK, Badylak SF (2001) Small bowel tissue engineering using small intestinal submucosa as a scaffold. J Surg Res 99(2):352–358Google Scholar
  13. Chiellini F, Piras MA, Errico C, Chiellini E (2008) Micro/nanostructured polymeric systems for biological and pharmaceutical applications. Nanomedicine 3(3):367–393Google Scholar
  14. Chiu W, Chang Y, Kuo H, Lin M, Wen H (2008) A study of carbon nanotubes/biodegradable plastic polylactic acid composites. J Appl Polym Sci 108(5):3024–3030Google Scholar
  15. Croisier F, Jérôme C (2013) Chitosan-based biomaterials for tissue engineering. Eur Polymer J 49(4):780–792Google Scholar
  16. Dang KM, Yoksan R (2015) Development of thermoplastic starch blown film by incorporating plasticized chitosan. Carbohyd Polym 115:575–581Google Scholar
  17. Dang KM, Yoksan R (2016) Morphological characteristics and barrier properties of thermoplastic starch/chitosan blown film. Carbohyd Polym 150:40–47Google Scholar
  18. Das S, Hollister SJ, Flanagan C, Adewunmi A, Bark K, Chen C, Ramaswamy K, Rose D, Widjaja E (2003) Freeform fabrication of Nylon-6 tissue engineering scaffolds. Rapid Prototyping J 9(1):43–49Google Scholar
  19. Dash AK, Cudworth GC II (1998) Therapeutic applications of implantable drug delivery systems. J Pharmacol Toxiocol Methods 40(1):1–12Google Scholar
  20. Dash M, Chiellini F, Ottenbrite R, Chiellini E (2011) Chitosan—a versatile semi-synthetic polymer in biomedical applications. Prog Polym Sci 36(8):981–1014Google Scholar
  21. Dutta PK, Tripathi S, Mehrotra GK, Dutta J (2009) Perspectives for chitosan based antimicrobial films in food applications. Food Chem 114(4):1173–1182Google Scholar
  22. Fallahiarezoudar E, Ahmadipourroudposht M, Idris A, Mohd Yusof N (2015) Review: a review of: application of synthetic scaffold in tissue engineering heart valves. Mater Sci Eng, C 48:556–565Google Scholar
  23. Faruk O, Bledzki AK, Fink HP, Sain M (2012) Progress in polymer science biocomposites reinforced with natural fibres: 2000–2010. Prog Polym Sci 37(11):1552–1596Google Scholar
  24. Formela K, Zedler Ł, Hejna A, Tercjak A (2018) Reactive extrusion of bio-based polymer blends and composites—current trends and future developments. Expr Polym Lett 12(1):24–57Google Scholar
  25. Frederick T, Wallenberger T, Norman E (2004) Natural fibers, plastics and composites. Springer, BostonGoogle Scholar
  26. Gall K, Yakacki CM, Liu Y, Shandas R, Willett N, Anseth KS (2005) Thermomechanics of the shape memory effect in polymers for biomedical applications. J Biomed Mater Res, Part A 73A(3):339–348Google Scholar
  27. Gascons M, Blanco N, Matthys K (2012) Evolution of manufacturing processes for fiber-reinforced thermoset tanks vessels and silos: a review. IIE Trans 44(6):476–489Google Scholar
  28. Gibril ME, Huan L, Haifeng L, Da LX, Yue Z, Han K, Muhuo Y (2013) Reactive extrusion process for the preparation of a high concentration solution of cellulose in ionic liquid for in situ chemical modification. RSC Adv 3:1021–1024Google Scholar
  29. Gomes ME, Ribeiro AS, Malafaya PB, Reis RL, Cunha AM (2001) A new approach based on injection moulding to produce biodegradable starch-based polymeric scaffolds: morphology, mechanical and degradation behavior. Biomaterials 22:883–889Google Scholar
  30. Gross BC, Erkal JL, Lockwood SY, Chen C, Spence DM (2014) Evaluation of 3D printing and its potential impact on biotechnology and the chemical sciences. Anal Chem 86(7):3240–3253Google Scholar
  31. Gunatillake P, Mayadunne R, Adhikari R (2006) Recent development in biodegradable synthetic polymers. Biotechnol Annu Rev 12:301–347Google Scholar
  32. Haafiz MKM, Hassan A, Zakaria Z, Inuwa IM, Islam MS, Jawaid M (2013) Properties of polylactic acid composites reinforced with oil palm biomass microcrystalline cellulose. Carbohyd Polym 98:139–145Google Scholar
  33. Hamzeh Y, Ashori A, Mirzaei B (2011) Effects of waste paper sludge on the physico-mechanical properties of high density polyethylene/wood flour composites. J Polym Environ 19(1):120–124Google Scholar
  34. Haq M, Burgueño R, Mohanty AK, Misra M (2008) Hybrid bio-based composites from blends of unsaturated polyester and soybean oil reinforced with nanoclay and natural fibers. Composites Science and Technology 68:3344–3351Google Scholar
  35. Haugen H, Will J, Fuchs W, Wintermantel E (2006) A novel processing method for injection-molded polyether-urethane scaffolds, part 1: processing. J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater 77B(1):65–72Google Scholar
  36. Hong H, Dong N, Shi J, Chen S, Guo C, Hu P, Qi H (2009) Fabrication of a novel hybrid heart valve leaflet for tissue engineering: an in vitro study. Artif Organs 33:554–558Google Scholar
  37. Hooreweder BV, Moens D, Boonen R, Kruth JP, Sas P (2013) On the difference in material structure and fatigue properties of nylon specimens produced by injection molding and selective laser sintering. Polym Testing 32:972–981Google Scholar
  38. Hottot A, Vessot S, Andrieu J (2004) A direct characterization method of the ice morphology relationship between mean crystals size and primary drying times of freeze-drying processes. Dry Technol 22:2009–2021Google Scholar
  39. Hyland LL (2012) Mechanical structural and biological properties of biopolymer-based hydrogels PhD dissertation. Department of Bioengineering, University of Maryland, College Park, MD, USAGoogle Scholar
  40. Isabelle V, Lan T (2009) Biodegradable polymers. Materials 2(2):307–344Google Scholar
  41. Jahnavi S, Kumary T, Bhuvaneshwar G, Natarajan T, Verma R (2015) Engineering of a polymer layered bio-hybrid heart valve scaffold. Mater Sci Eng, C 51:263–273Google Scholar
  42. John MJ, Thomas S (2008) Biofibres and biocomposites. Carbohyd Polym 71:343–364Google Scholar
  43. Ju XJ, Xie R, Yang L, Chu LY (2009) Biodegradable “intelligent” materials in response to physical stimuli for biomedical applications. Expert Opin Ther Pat 19(4):493–507Google Scholar
  44. Karande TS, Ong JL, Agrawal CM (2004) Diffusion in musculoskeletal tissue engineering scaffolds: design issues related to porosity, permeability, architecture, and nutrient mixing. Ann Biomed Eng 32(12):1728–1743Google Scholar
  45. Kasuga T, Ota Y, Nogami M, Abe Y (2001) Preparation and mechanical properties of polylactic acid composites containing hydroxyapatite fibers. Biomaterials 22:19–23Google Scholar
  46. Kiick KL (2007) Material science. Polymer Ther Sci 317(5842):1182–1183Google Scholar
  47. Kim SS, Ahn KM, Park MS, Lee JH, Choi CY, Kim BS (2007) A poly(lactideco-glycolide)/ hydroxyapatite composite scaffold with enhanced osteoconductivity. J Biomed Mater Res, Part A 80:206–215Google Scholar
  48. Kobayashi M, Suong HH (2010) Development and evaluation of polyvinyl alcohol-hydrogels as an artificial articular cartilage for orthopedic implants. Materials 3(4):2753–2771Google Scholar
  49. Korol J, Lenża J, Formela K (2015) Manufacture and research of TPS/PE biocomposites properties. Compos B Eng 68:310–316Google Scholar
  50. Kramschuster A, Turng LS (2010) An injection molding process for manufacturing highly porous and interconnected biodegradable polymer matrices for use as tissue engineering scaffolds. J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater 92B(2):366–376Google Scholar
  51. Langasco R, Spada G, Tanriverdi ST, Rassu G, Giunchedi P, Özer O, Gavini E (2016) Bio-based topical system for enhanced salicylic acid delivery: preparation and performance of gels. J Pharm Pharmacol 68(8):999–1009Google Scholar
  52. Le Guen MJ, Newman RH (2007) Pulped Phormium tenax leaf fibers as reinforcement for epoxy composites. Compos A Appl Sci Manuf 38:2109–2115Google Scholar
  53. Lee KY, Mooney DJ (2012) Alginate: properties and biomedical applications. Prog Polym Sci 37(1):106–126Google Scholar
  54. Lee S, Kang I, Doh G, Yoon H, Park B, Wu Q (2008) Thermal and mechanical properties of wood flour/talc-filled polylactic acid composites: effect of filler content and coupling treatment. J Thermoplast Compos Mater 21(3):209–223Google Scholar
  55. Li X, Cui R, Liu W, Sun L, Yu B, Fan Y, Feng Q, Cui F, Watari F (2013) The use of nanoscaled fibers or tubes to improve biocompatibility and bioactivity of biomedical materials. J Nanomater 2013:1–16Google Scholar
  56. Liu W, Drzal LT, Mohanty AM, Misran M (2007) Influence of processing methods and fibre length on physical properties of kenaf fibre reinforced soy based biocomposites. J Compos Eng Part B 38:352–359Google Scholar
  57. Lu L, Peter SJ, Lyman MD, Lai HL, Leite SM, Tamada JA, Vacanti JP, Langer R, Mikos AG (2000) In vitro degradation of porous poly(L-lactic acid) foams. Biomaterials 21:1595–1605Google Scholar
  58. Lu HH, El-Amin SF, Scott KD, Laurencin CT (2003) Three-dimensional bioactive biodegradable polymer-bioactive glass composite scaffolds with improved mechanical properties support collagen synthesis and mineralization of human osteoblast-like cells in vitro. J Biomed Mater Res 64A(3):465–474Google Scholar
  59. Ma PX (2004) Scaffolds for tissue fabrication. Mater Today 7:30–40Google Scholar
  60. Malheiro VN, Caridade SG, Alves NM, Mano JF (2010) New poly(ε-caprolactone)/chitosan blend fibers for tissue engineering applications. Acta Biomater 6(2):418–428Google Scholar
  61. Mallick PK (2007) Fiber-reinforced composites: materials, manufacturing, and design, 3rd edn. CRC Press, Boca RatonGoogle Scholar
  62. Meng J, Xiao B, Zhang Y, Liu J, Xue H, Lei J, Kong H, Huang Y, Jin Z, Gu N, Xu H (2013) Super-paramagnetic responsive nanofibrous scaffolds under static magnetic field enhance osteogenesis for bone repair in vivo. Sci Rep 3:2655Google Scholar
  63. Mi H, Salick MR, Jing X, Jacques BR, Crone WC, Peng X, Turng L (2013) Characterization of thermoplastic polyurethane/polylactic acid (TPU/PLA) tissue engineering scaffolds fabricated by microcellular injection molding. Mater Sci Eng, C 33:4767–4776Google Scholar
  64. Mikos AG, Sarakinos G, Leite SM, Vacanti JP, Langer R (1993) Laminated three-dimensional biodegradable foams for use in tissue engineering. Biomaterials 14:323–330Google Scholar
  65. Miller AT, Safranski DL, Smith KE, Sycks DG, Guldberg RE, Gall K (2017) Fatigue of injection molded and 3D printed polycarbonate urethane in solution. Polymer 108:121–134Google Scholar
  66. Mohanty AK, Misra M, Drzal LT (2002) Sustainable bio-composites from renewable resources: opportunities and challenges in the green materials world. J Polym Environ 10(1/2):19–26Google Scholar
  67. Mustafa N (1993) Plastic waste management: disposal, recycling, Reuse. Marcel Dekker Inc., New YorkGoogle Scholar
  68. Nam YS, Park TG (1999) Biodegradable polymeric microcellular foams by modified thermally induced phase separation method. Biomaterials 20:1783–1790Google Scholar
  69. Nampoothiri KM, Nair NR, John RP (2010) An overview of the recent developments in polylactide (PLA) research. Biores Technol 101(22):8493–8501Google Scholar
  70. National Research Council (2000) Biobased industrial products: research and commercialization priorities. The National Academies Press, Washington, DC, USAGoogle Scholar
  71. Nirmal RS, Nair PD (2013) Significance of soluble growth factors in the chondrogenic response of human umbilical cord matrix stem cells in a porous three-dimensional scaffold. Eur Cells Mater 26:234–251Google Scholar
  72. Noreen A, Nazli Z, Akram J, Rasul I, Mansha A, Yaqoob N, Iqbal R, Tabasum S, Zuber M, Zia KM (2017) Pectins functionalized biomaterials, a new viable approach for biomedical applications: a review. Int J Biol Macromol 101:254–272Google Scholar
  73. Okamoto M (2006) Biodegradable polymer/layered silicate nanocomposites: a review. In: Mallapragada S, Narasimhan B (eds) Handbook of biodegradable polymeric materials and their applications. American Scientific Publishers, Los Angeles, pp 153–197Google Scholar
  74. Okamoto M, John B (2013) Synthetic biopolymer nanocomposites for tissue engineering scaffolds. Prog Polym Sci 38:1487–1503Google Scholar
  75. Paiva JMF, Frollini E (2006) Unmodified and modified surface sisal fibers as reinforcement of phenolic and lignophenolic matrices composites: thermal analyses of fibers and composites. Macromol Mater Eng 291:405–417Google Scholar
  76. Park SH, Oh KW, Kim SH (2013) Reinforcement effect of cellulose nanowhisker on bio-based polyurethane. Compos Sci Technol 86:82–88Google Scholar
  77. Piskin E (2002) Biodegradable polymeric matrices for bioartifical implants. Int J Artif Organs 25(5):434–440Google Scholar
  78. Prasad A, Sankar MR, Katiyar V (2017) State of art on solvent casting particulate leaching method for orthopedic scaffolds fabrication. Mater Today: Proc 4(A):898–907Google Scholar
  79. Quirino RL, Woodford J, Larock RC (2012) Soybean and linseed oil-based composites reinforced with wood flour and wood fibers. J Appl Polym Sci 124(2):1520–1528Google Scholar
  80. Quirk RA, France RM, Shakesheff KM, Howdle SM (2004) Supercritical fluid technologies and tissue engineering scaffolds. Curr Opin Solid State Mater Sci 8:313–821Google Scholar
  81. Ray PK, Chakravarty AC, Bandyopadhyay SB (1976) Fine structure and mechanical properties of jute differently dried after retting. J Appl Polym Sci 20(7):1765–1767Google Scholar
  82. Render D, Rangari VK, Jeelani S, Fadlalla K, Samuel T (2014) Biobased Calcium Carbonate (CaCO3) nanoparticles for drug delivery applications. Int J Biomed Nanosci Nanotechnol 3(3):221–235Google Scholar
  83. Rochman A, Zahra K (2016) Influence of melt mixer on injection molding of thermoset elastomers. AIP Conf Proc 1769(1):1–6Google Scholar
  84. Rogers D (2017) Understanding processing technologies and coatings for medical devices. Med Des Technol 21(5):8–9Google Scholar
  85. Rogers L, Said SS, Mequanint K (2013) The effects of fabrication strategies on 3D scaffold morphology porosity and vascular smooth muscle cell response. J Biomater Tissue Eng 3:300–311Google Scholar
  86. Roh HS, Lee CM, Hwang YH, Kook MS, Yang SW, Lee D, Kim B (2017) Addition of MgO nanoparticles and plasma surface treatment of three-dimensional printed polycaprolactone/hydroxyapatite scaffolds for improving bone regeneration. Mater Sci Eng, C 74:525–535Google Scholar
  87. Rouse JG, Dyke ME (2010) A review of keratin-based biomaterials for biomedical applications. Materials 3(2):999–1014Google Scholar
  88. Scheffler T, Saalbach H, Englich S, Gehde M (2015) Process monitoring during injection moulding of thermosetting materials. Int Polym Sci Technol 42(8):T/1–8Google Scholar
  89. Scholz A, Lewis RL, Bachan M, Stewart AL, Quirino RL (2017) Biocomposites from the reinforcement of a tung oil-based thermosetting resin with collagen. Mater Chem Frontier 1(1):1795–1803Google Scholar
  90. Schubert C, Langeveld MC, Donoso LA (2014) Innovations in 3D printing: a 3D overview from optics to organs. Br J Ophthalmol 98(2):159–161Google Scholar
  91. Semsarzadeh MA (1986) Fiber matrix interactions in jute reinforced polyester resin. Polym Compos 7:23–25Google Scholar
  92. Shen X, Shamshina JL, Berton P, Gurau G, Rogers RD (2015) Hydrogels based oncellulose and chitin: fabrication, properties, and applications. Green Chem 18(1):53–75Google Scholar
  93. Shleton B, Shivnan JC (2014) Acute hypersensitivity reactions: what nurses need to know. Johns Hopkins Nursing Magazine. magazinenursingjhuedu/2011/04/acute-hypersensitivity-reactions-what-nurses-need-to-know/. Accessed 24 Jan 2018Google Scholar
  94. Sokolowski W, Metcalfe A, Hayashi S, Yahia L, Raymond J (2007) Medical applications of shape memory polymers. Biomed Mater 2(1):S23–S27Google Scholar
  95. Spinella S, Ganesh M, Re GL, Zhang S, Raquez JM, Dubois P, Gross RA (2015) Enzymatic reactive extrusion: moving towards continuous enzyme-catalysed polyester polymerisation and processing. Green Chem 17(8):4146–4150Google Scholar
  96. Stark NM (1999) Wood fiber derived from scrap pallets used in polypropylene composites. Forest Prod J 48(6):39–46Google Scholar
  97. Stark NM, Matuana LM (2004) Surface chemistry changes of weathered HDPE/wood-flour composites studied by XPS and FTIR spectroscopy. Polym Degrad Stab 86:1–9Google Scholar
  98. Storz H, Vorlop K (2013) Bio-based plastics: status challenges and trends. Appl Agric For Res 63:321–332Google Scholar
  99. Sydenstricker TH, Mochnaz S, Amico SC (2003) Pull-out and other evaluations in sisal-reinforced polyester biocomposites. Polym Testing 22:375–380Google Scholar
  100. Taylor PM, Sachlos E, Dreger SA, Chester AH, Czernuszka JT, Yacoub MH (2006) Interaction of human valve interstitial cells with collagen matrices manufactured using rapid prototyping. Biomaterials 27(13):2733–2737Google Scholar
  101. Taylor C, Amiri A, Paramarta A, Ulven C, Webster D (2017) Development and weatherability of bio-based composites of structural quality using flax fiber and epoxidized sucrose soyate. Mater Des 113:17–26Google Scholar
  102. Ulery BD, Nair LS, Laurencin CT (2011) Biomedical applications of biodegradable polymers. J Polym Sci, Part B: Polym Phys 49(12):832–864Google Scholar
  103. Vandeweyenberg I, Chitruong T, Vangrimde B, Verpoest I (2006) Improving the properties of UD flax fibre reinforced composites by applying an alkaline fibre treatment. Compos A Appl Sci Manuf 37:1368–1376Google Scholar
  104. Wei L, McDonald AG, Stark NM (2015) Grafting of bacterial polyhydroxybutyrate (PHB) onto cellulose via in situ reactive extrusion with dicumyl peroxide. Biomacromolecules 16:1040–1049Google Scholar
  105. Whang K, Thomas CH, Healy KE, Nuber GA (1995) A novel method to fabricate bioabsorbable scaffolds. Polymer 36:837–842Google Scholar
  106. Williams DF (2008) Leading opinion: on the mechanisms of biocompatibility. Biomaterials 29:2941–2953Google Scholar
  107. Wu L, Jing D, Ding J (2006) A ‘‘room-temperature’’ injection molding/particulate leaching approach for fabrication of biodegradable three-dimensional porous scaffolds. Biomaterials 27:185–191Google Scholar
  108. Wu J, Li Y, Zhang Y (2017) Use of intraoral scanning and 3-dimensional printing in the fabrication of a removable partial denture for a patient with limited mouth opening. J Am Dent Assoc 148(5):338–341Google Scholar
  109. Xie J, Li X, Xia Y (2008) Putting electrospun nanofibers to work for biomedical research. Macromol Rapid Commun 29:1775–1792Google Scholar
  110. Xie L, Yu H, Yang W, Zhu Z, Yue L (2016) Preparation in vitro degradability cytotoxicity and in vivo biocompatibility of porous hydroxyapatite whisker-reinforced poly(L-lactide) biocomposite scaffolds. J Biomater Sci Polym Ed 27(6):505–528Google Scholar
  111. Xu X, Zhou M (2008) Antimicrobial gelatin nanofibers containing silver nanoparticles. Fibers Polym 9:685–690Google Scholar
  112. Yang S, Leong K, Du Z, Chua C (2001) The design of scaffolds for use in tissue engineering. I. Traditional factors. Tissue Eng 7:679–689Google Scholar
  113. Yang Y, Tong Z, Geng Y, Li Y, Zhang M (2013) Biobased polymer composites derived from corn stover and feather meals as double-coating materials for controlled-release and water-retention urea fertilizers. J Agric Food Chem 61:8166–8174Google Scholar
  114. Yu Z, Alsammarraie FK, Nayigiziki FX, Wang W, Vardhanabhuti B, Mustapha A, Lin M (2017) Effect and mechanism of cellulose nanofibrils on the active functions of biopolymer-based nanocomposite films. Food Res Int 99(1):166–172Google Scholar
  115. Zarina S, Ahmad I (2015) Biodegradable composite films based on κ-carrageenan reinforced by cellulose nanocrystal from kenaf fibers. BioResources 10(1):256–271Google Scholar
  116. Zeronian SH, Kawabata H, Alger K (1990) Factors affecting the tensile properties of non-mercerized and mercerized cotton fibers. Text Res J 60(3):179–183Google Scholar
  117. Zimoch-Korzycka A, Śmieszek A, Jarmoluk A, Nowak U, Marycz K (2016) Potential biomedical application of enzymatically treated alginate/chitosan hydrosols in sponges - biocompatible scaffolds inducing chondrogenic differentiation of human adipose derived multipotent stromal cells. Polymers 8(9):320Google Scholar
  118. Zopf DA, Hollister SJ, Nelson ME, Ohye RG, Green GE (2013) Bioresorbable airway splint created with a three-dimensional printer. N Engl J Med 368(21):2043–2045Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Amanda Murawski
    • 1
  • Rashid Diaz
    • 1
  • Sarah Inglesby
    • 1
  • Khristal Delabar
    • 1
  • Rafael L. Quirino
    • 1
    Email author
  1. 1.Chemistry DepartmentGeorgia Southern UniversityStatesboroUSA

Personalised recommendations