Development of self-assembled bacterial cellulose–starch nanocomposites

Grande, Cristian J.; Torres, Fernando G.; Gómez, Clara M.; Troncoso, Omar P.; Canet‐Ferrer, Josep; Martínez‐Pastor, Juan P.

doi:10.1016/j.msec.2008.09.024

Cited by 174 publications

(95 citation statements)

References 43 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…BC differs from plant cellulose in its higher purity, crystallinity, and tensile strength. [67] To further improve their physical and biological properties, GO has been incorporated in different types of cellulose. To date, different types of cellulose and its derivatives have been blended with GO including BC and carboxymethyl cellulose.…”

Section: Cellulose and Starchmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Graphene Oxide/Polymer‐Based Biomaterials

2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Since its discovery in 2004, derivatives of graphene have been developed and heavily investigated in the field of tissue engineering. Among the most extensively studied forms of graphene, graphene oxide (GO), and GO/ polymer-based nanocomposites have attracted great attention in various forms such as films, 3D porous scaffolds, electrospun mats, hydrogels, and nacre-like structures. In this review, the most actively investigated GO/ polymer nanocomposites are presented and discussed, these nanocomposites are based on chitosan, cellulose, starch, alginate, gellan gum, poly(vinyl alcohol) (PVA), poly(acrylamide), poly(e-caprolactone) (PCL), poly(lactic acid) (PLLA), poly(lactide-co-glycolide) (PLGA), gelatin, collagen, and silk fibroin (SF). The biological and mechanical performance of such nanocomposites are comprehensively scrutinized and ongoing research questions are addressed. The analysis of the literature reveals overall the great potential of GO/ polymer nanocomposites in tissue engineering strategies and indicates also a series of challenges requiring further research efforts.

show abstract

Section: Cellulose and Starchmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…GO is also incorporated in starch in order to improve its physical and biological properties. [67,75,76] GO/starch nanocomposites were produced in the form of films.…”

Section: (7 Of 22)mentioning

confidence: 99%

Graphene Oxide/Polymer‐Based Biomaterials

2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…During this step, starch was forced to further penetrate the BC network. The self-assembled BC-starch nanocomposites displayed coherent morphologies (Grande et al, 2009). Since the oxygen produced by the electrolysis of water in the culture media is far from the liquid-air boundary, aerobic cellulose production into 3D structures is readily achievable.…”

Section: Self-assembled and Oriented Bacterial Cellulosementioning

confidence: 99%

Bacterial Cellulose for Skin Repair Materials

Fu¹,

Zhang²,

Zhang³

et al. 2011

Biomedical Engineering - Frontiers and Challenges

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…The Acetobacter xylinum bacterial strain has been found to grow preferably on the surfaces of some polymers and natural fibers when placed in the culture medium, rather than freely in pure medium [13,[19][20][21][22]. The natural fibers and some natural polymers (e.g., starch) can provide ideal substrates for the bacteria to grow on.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…As a result, BC-based hybrid structures and nanocomposites can be formed through the fermentation process in the presence of natural fibers or polymers. The plentiful hydroxyl groups present on the surfaces of cellulosic fibers and polymeric substrates and the BC help to promote strong interaction between the two through hydrogen bonding [13,[19][20][21][22].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

In Situ Produced Bacterial Cellulose Nanofiber-Based Hybrids for Nanocomposites

Qiu

Netravali

2017

Fibers

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Two high-performance bacterial cellulose (BC) nanofiber-based hybrid structures were produced using an in situ self-assembly approach, one with microfibrillated cellulose (MFC) and another with sisal fiber, by incorporating them in the fermentation media. The fabricated BC-MFC hybrid and BC-sisal hybrid fibers showed enhanced mechanical properties compared to pure BC and sisal fibers, respectively. Tensile tests indicated BC-MFC hybrid and their nanocomposites fabricated with soy protein isolate (SPI) resin had better tensile properties than corresponding BC and BC-SPI nanocomposites. This was because of the uniform distribution of MFC within the BC nanofiber network structure which reduced the defects such as pores and voids or intersections of the BC nanofibers. BC-sisal hybrid fibrous structures were obtained after BC nanofibers self-assembled on the surface of the sisal fibers during the fermentation. The results of the microbond tests indicated that the BC-sisal hybrid fiber/SPI resin bond strength was higher than the control sisal fiber/SPI resin bond with p value of 0.02 at the significance level of 0.05. Higher bond strength is preferred since it can potentially lead to better tensile properties of the composites. The presented work suggests a novel route to fabricate hybrid nanocomposites with higher functional properties.

show abstract

Development of self-assembled bacterial cellulose–starch nanocomposites

Cited by 174 publications

References 43 publications

Graphene Oxide/Polymer‐Based Biomaterials

Graphene Oxide/Polymer‐Based Biomaterials

Bacterial Cellulose for Skin Repair Materials

In Situ Produced Bacterial Cellulose Nanofiber-Based Hybrids for Nanocomposites

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About