4.7 Article

Eco-friendly films prepared from plantain flour/PCL blends under reactive extrusion conditions using zirconium octanoate as a catalyst

期刊

CARBOHYDRATE POLYMERS
卷 178, 期 -, 页码 260-269

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.carbpol.2017.09.026

关键词

Active films; Antimicrobial properties; Cross-linking; Poly(epsilon-caprolactone); Starch

资金

  1. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Cientificas y Tecnicas (CONICET) [2417]
  2. Universidad Nacional de Mar del Plata (UNMdP)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Plantain flour ( Musa ssp., group AAB, sub-group clone Harton)/ poly(e-caprolactone) (PCL) blends, containing glycerol as a plasticizer, were prepared by reactive extrusion (REx) in a twin-screw extruder using zirconium octanoate (Zr(Oct)(4)) as a catalyst, followed by thermo-compression molding for film development. The films were then characterized in terms of their: infrared (FTIR) spectra, water solubility, thermogravimetric (TGA) curves, differential scanning calorimetry (DSC) thermograms, and X-ray diffraction (XDR) diffractograms, as well as their microstructural, mechanical and antimicrobial properties in order to (1) compare the effects of PCLs with two different molecular weights (M-w) on the characteristics of the plantain flour/PCL blends, and (2) determine whether using Zr(Oct)(4) in the production of active composite polymer materials improves their properties. The plantain flour/PCL blends were all developed successfully. The higher Mw PCL gave more hydrophobic and thermally stable films with improved mechanical properties. The addition of the Zr(Oct)(4) catalyst to the plantain flour/PCL blends also resulted in films with similar characteristics to those described above, due to the cross-linking of the polymers. In addition, the films containing the catalyst showed antimicrobial activity against Escherichia coli O157: H7 and Staphylococcus aureus indicating a dual effect of Zr(Oct)(4), and making it an attractive alternative for the development of active films.

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

4.7
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