4.4 Article

Mechanical, barrier, antibacterial and biodegradable properties of carrageenan/natamycin/graphene hybrid bio nanocomposite film for active antimicrobial food packaging applications

期刊

JOURNAL OF POLYMER RESEARCH
卷 30, 期 11, 页码 -

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10965-023-03791-7

关键词

Carrageenan; Natamycin; Graphene; Food Packaging

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This research describes the preparation and characterization of a carrageenan bio nanocomposite film mixed with natamycin and graphene nanoparticles. The addition of graphene improved the properties of the film, making it suitable for food packaging applications.
The present research work describes the preparation of natamycin and graphene nanoparticles mixed carrageenan bio nanocomposite film and characterize with respect to food packaging applications. The carrageenan bio nanocomposite films were prepared by solvent casting method with various wt% (0.1, 0.2, 0.3) of graphene and natamycin. The films were characterized using Fourier Transform InfraRed spectroscopy (FTIR) and Scanning Electron Microscopy (SEM). The SEM results showed that the natamycin and graphene were properly distributed in the carrageenan matrix. The addition of graphene increased the surface hydrophobicity and decreased the porosity of films. The maximum opacity and tensile strength of the film was achieved in 0.3 wt% of graphene and the value was 94.58 % and 26.1 MPa respectively. The mixing of graphene significantly reduced the Oxygen Transmission Rate (OTR) and WaterVapour Transmission Rate (WVTR) of the bio nanocomposite film. The carrageenan/natamycin/graphene bio nanocomposite films exhibited a strong antibacterial activity against the foodborne gram-positive (S. aureus) and gram-negative pathogenic (E. coli) bacteria and it also showed a good biodegradable property. Conclusively, the carrageenan/natamycin/graphene bio nanocomposite films led to the suitable packaging material and they have high potential in active food packaging applications.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据