Biobased Packaging Materials: Sustainable Alternative to Conventional Packaging Materials [1st ed. 2023] 9819960495, 9789819960491

Table of contents :
Foreword
Preface
Contents
Editor and Contributors
1: Food Biopackaging for Human Benefits: Status and Perspectives
1.1 Introduction
1.1.1 Importance of Food Packaging on a Global Platform
1.2 Biodegradable Packaging
1.2.1 Edible Coating Preservation Mechanism for Food Products
1.2.2 Overview of Biodegradation of Biodegradable Films
1.2.3 The Properties of Biodegradable Films Essential for Food Biopack
1.2.3.1 Impact of Structural Properties
1.2.3.2 Contribution of Permeability Properties
1.2.3.3 Impact of Mechanical Properties
1.2.3.4 The Solubility Properties
1.2.3.5 Optical Properties
1.3 Exploration of Biobased Polymers
1.3.1 Group One: Polymers Directly Obtained from Biomass
1.3.1.1 Polysaccharides
1.3.1.2 Starch and Its Derivatives
1.3.1.3 Cellulose and Derivatives
1.3.1.4 Chitin/Chitosan
1.3.1.5 Proteins
1.3.1.6 Casein
1.3.1.7 Gluten
1.3.1.8 Soy Protein
1.3.1.9 Keratin
1.3.1.10 Collagen
1.3.1.11 Whey
1.3.1.12 Zein
1.3.2 Group 2: Contribution from Biobased Monomers and Polymers
1.3.2.1 Contribution of Polylactic Acid (PLA)
1.3.2.2 Biobased Monomers
1.4 Manufacturing of Biobased Food Packaging
1.4.1 Utilisation of Biobased Materials
1.4.2 Application of the Barrier Films
1.5 Advances in Packaging Technology
1.6 Safety and Food Contact Legislation
1.6.1 Biobased Materials and Legislation on Food Contact Materials
1.6.2 Common Legislation Requirements
1.6.3 Food Biopack Interactions
1.6.3.1 Role of Migration of Compounds
1.6.3.2 Microbiological Contamination of Biobased Food Packages
1.7 Patents
1.8 Conclusion
References
2: Processing of Biobased Packaging Materials
2.1 Introduction
2.2 Overview of Biobased Materials
2.3 Biobased Materials
2.3.1 Biobased Fibers
2.3.1.1 Plants Biobased Fiber
2.3.1.2 Processing Techniques of Biobased Fibers
2.3.1.3 Properties of Biobased Fibers
2.3.2 Biofilm and Biopolymer Plastic Materials
2.3.2.1 Processing Techniques of Biofilms
2.3.2.2 Characterization Techniques for Biobased Films
2.3.2.3 Properties of Biobased Films
2.3.2.4 Advantages and Disadvantages of Biobased Films
2.3.3 Biobased Composite Materials
2.3.3.1 Fiber-Reinforced Biobased Composites Materials
2.3.3.2 Properties of Biobased Composites Materials
2.3.3.3 Advantage, Advancement, and Limitations of Biocomposites
2.4 Processing Biobased Packaging Materials
2.5 Future Scope of Biobased Packaging Materials
2.6 Conclusion
References
3: Potential of PHA (Polyhydroxyalkanoates) Polymers as Packaging Materials: From Concept to Commercialization
3.1 Introduction
3.1.1 Overview on Biopolymers and Bioplastics
3.1.2 Brief Outline on Bioplastic Structure and Classification
3.1.3 PHA (Polyhydroxyalkanoates) and Its Types
3.1.4 Processing of PHA
3.2 Biowastes Utilized for the Production of Bioplastics
3.2.1 Polysaccharide-Based Bioplastics
3.2.2 Protein-Based Bioplastics
3.2.3 Protein from Plants
3.2.4 Proteins Sourced from Animals
3.3 Role of Microbes for Production of Bioplastics
3.3.1 Biosynthesis of Microbial Bioplastics
3.3.1.1 In Vitro Synthesis of Microbial Bioplastic Granules
3.3.1.2 Synthesis of Microbial Bioplastic Granule In Vivo
3.3.2 PHA and its Copolymers Produced by Microbes
3.3.3 Fermentation Strategies for PHA/PHB Production
3.3.4 Processing of PHB (Recovery and Purification)
3.4 Methods and Techniques Available for Manufacturing of Commercial Bioplastics
3.4.1 Bioplastic Manufacturing and Traditional Technologies
3.4.1.1 Moulding of Injection
3.4.1.2 Compression Moulding
3.4.1.3 Extrusion
3.4.1.4 Electrospinning
3.4.1.5 Casting Method
3.4.2 Innovative Technologies for the Production of PHA
3.4.2.1 Engineered Microorganism and PHAome
3.4.2.2 Recycling and Symbiotic Technologies
3.5 Prospects and Applications of Bioplastics
3.5.1 Medical Applications
3.5.1.1 Applications in Tissue Engineering and Regenerative Medicine
3.5.1.2 Orthopaedic
3.5.1.3 Cardiovascular
3.5.1.4 Nerve
3.5.1.5 Drug Delivery
3.5.1.6 Wound Management
3.5.1.7 Medical Devices
3.5.1.8 Conjugation of Drugs
3.5.1.9 Adhesion and Proliferation of Cells
3.5.1.10 Tissue Engineering
3.5.2 Agricultural and Horticultural Applications
3.5.2.1 Supplemental Water Supply Using Bioplastic Matrices
3.5.2.2 Bioplastic Matrices as Devices for the Controlled Release of Fertilizers
3.5.2.3 Analyses of Plants
3.5.2.4 Agro-textile Applications
3.5.2.5 Mulching Film Applications
3.5.3 In Bioremediation
3.5.3.1 In Situ Bioremediation
3.5.3.2 Ex Situ Bioremediation
3.5.4 Automobile Application
3.5.5 In 3D Bioprinting
3.5.5.1 Myocardial Bioprinting
3.5.5.2 Knee Joint Articular Cartilage
3.5.5.3 Bone Health and Regeneration
3.5.5.4 Human Neuroblastoma
3.5.5.5 Cancer Tumour
3.5.5.6 Grafting of Fat
3.5.6 The 4D Bioprinting
3.5.7 Food Packaging Applications
3.5.7.1 PLA and PHAs-Based Active Packaging Materials
3.5.7.2 Cellulose Products in the Active Food Packaging Materials
3.5.7.3 Active Food Packaging Containing TPS
3.5.7.4 Synthetic Biodegradable Plastics for Food Packaging
3.5.7.5 Food Packaging Materials from Poly(caprolactone)
3.5.7.6 PVA-Based Food Packaging Materials
3.5.7.7 PBAT-Based Food Packaging Materials
3.6 Non-degradable Bioplastic Polymers in Active Food Packaging
3.6.1 Bio-Poly-(ethylene Terephthalate) (Bio-PET)
3.6.2 Bio-polyamides (Bio-PA)
3.6.3 Bio-poly-(trimethylene Terephthalate) (Bio-PTT)
3.7 Conclusion
References
4: Applications of Cellulose in Biobased Food Packaging Systems
4.1 Introduction
4.2 Biobased Materials
4.3 Biobased Polymers
4.3.1 Cellulose
4.3.1.1 Derivatives of Cellulose
4.3.1.1.1 Cellulose Acetate (CA)
4.3.1.1.2 Cellulose Sulfate (CS)
4.3.1.1.3 Carboxymethyl Cellulose (CMC)
4.3.1.1.4 Ethyl Cellulose (EC)
4.3.1.1.5 Methyl Cellulose (MC)
4.3.1.1.6 Regenerated Cellulose (RC)
4.4 Biobased (Cellulose) Nanomaterials in Food Packaging
4.4.1 Nanocellulose (NC)
4.4.1.1 Cellulose Nanocrystals (CNCs)
4.4.1.2 Cellulose Nanofibrils (CNFs)
4.4.1.3 Bacterial Nanocellulose (BNC)
4.5 Conclusion
References
5: Starch for Packaging Materials
5.1 Introduction
5.2 Starch: An Eco-friendly Packaging Material
5.2.1 Starch Sources
5.2.2 Properties of Biodegradable Starch Films Used in Food Packaging
5.2.2.1 Structural Properties
5.2.2.2 Solubility Properties
5.2.2.3 Mechanical Characteristics
5.2.2.4 Optical Properties
5.2.2.5 Permeability Properties
5.2.3 Starch Production and Processing
5.2.4 Starch Extraction
5.2.5 Reviews on the Previously Used Starch-Based Biodegradable Material
5.2.6 Use of Nanomaterials Based on Starch
5.3 Analyzing the Foods´ Shelf Life
5.3.1 Shelf Life Evaluation and Design Types
5.4 Films that Biodegrade for Use in Food Packaging Made of Starch: Issues and Challenges
5.5 Conclusions
References
6: Chitin and Chitosan for Packaging Materials
6.1 Introduction
6.2 The Impact of Chitosan Incorporation on the Film Properties
6.3 Blends of Biopolymers, Including Chitosan
6.4 Chitosan Film Characterization Using Nanofillers
6.5 Chitosan based Films with Active Compounds Preparation
6.6 Chitosan-Based Films as Systems for Packaging Material
6.7 Conclusion
References
7: Natural Antioxidants from Fruit By-products for Active Packaging Applications
7.1 Introduction
7.2 Antioxidants from Fruit By-products
7.2.1 Sources
7.2.1.1 Type of Natural Antioxidants
7.2.1.1.1 Vitamins
7.2.1.1.2 Flavonoids
7.2.1.1.3 Carotenoids
7.2.1.1.4 Phenolic Acids
7.2.1.2 Antioxidant Activity Determination
7.2.1.2.1 Hydrogen Transfer (HAT) Methods
7.2.1.2.2 Single Electron Transfer (SET) Methods
7.3 Applications in Active Packaging
7.3.1 Direct Application of Antioxidants
7.3.2 Incorporation in Polymer Films or Coatings
7.3.3 Incorporation via Other Methods
7.4 Future Prospects and Challenges
7.5 Conclusion
References
8: Bionanocomposites for Packaging Materials
8.1 Introduction
8.2 Bio-Based Packaging Technologies
8.2.1 Polylactic Acid (PLA)
8.2.2 Polyethylene Furanoate (PEF)
8.2.3 Polybutylene Succinate (PBS)
8.3 Functional and Smart Food Packaging
8.4 Antibacterial and Antifungal Bionanocomposites for Packaging
8.5 Final Considerations
References
9: Environmental Impact of Biobased Materials
9.1 Introduction
9.1.1 Biobased Materials for Food Packaging Applications
9.1.1.1 Polyhydroxyalkanoates (PHAs)
9.1.1.2 Polylactic Acid (PLA)
9.1.1.3 Starch
9.1.1.4 Chitosan
9.2 Conclusion
References
10: Safety and Associated Legislation of Selected Food Contact Bio-Based Packaging
10.1 Introduction
10.1.1 Food Packaging Applications and Utilisation
10.1.2 Potential Sustainable Packaging Material
10.1.3 Applications of Bio-based Polymers Food in Packaging
10.1.4 Physicochemical Properties
10.1.5 About Migration of Particles
10.1.6 Regulatory Aspects
10.1.6.1 United Kingdom (UK)
10.1.6.2 United State of America (USA)
10.1.6.3 Other Countries
10.1.7 Additional Information Regarding the Scope of the Chapter
10.2 Properties of Cellulose
10.2.1 Types of Cellulose and Cellulose Nanocrystal
10.2.1.1 Cellulose Nanocrystal
10.2.1.2 Cellulose Nanofibril Properties
10.2.1.3 Nanocellulose
10.2.2 Toxicological Assessment of Cellulose, Cellulose Derivatives and Nanocellulose Polymer
10.2.3 Other Peoples´ Perspectives
10.2.4 Other Scholars´ Thoughts
10.2.4.1 Microcrystalline Cellulose
10.2.4.2 Cellulose Derivatives
10.2.4.3 Nanocellulose
10.2.5 Legislation and Regulatory Framework
10.2.6 Conclusions on the risk and Challenges Related of Nanocellulose
10.3 Properties of Chitosan
10.3.1 Other Thoughts on Chitosan at the Micro-scale
10.3.2 Scholar´s Perspective on the Safety and Toxicity of Chitosan
10.3.3 Regulatory Framework Related to Chitosan
10.3.3.1 In Europe
10.3.3.2 USA
10.3.3.3 Relevant Regulations of Chitosan in Other Countries
10.3.4 Chitosan Nanoparticles (NPs)
10.3.4.1 Assimilation of Results on Chitosan Nanoparticles
10.3.4.2 Safety and Regulations of Chitosan Nanoparticles
10.3.4.3 Regulations and Legislation
10.4 Conclusion and Future Aspects
References
11: Life Cycle Analysis of Biobased Material
11.1 Introduction
11.2 Biobased Products
11.3 Biobased Materials
11.3.1 Bioplastics
11.3.2 Cellulose
11.3.3 Biobased Composites
11.3.4 Bioadhesives
11.3.5 Volatile Fatty Acids
11.3.6 Biosolvents
11.3.7 Succinic Acid
11.3.8 Biobased Chemical
11.3.9 Biogas
11.3.10 Biodiesel
11.4 Carbon Sequestration in Biobased Products
11.4.1 ADEME´s Biobased Materials Technique
11.4.2 The European Commission´s Lead Market Initiative
11.4.3 GHG Protocol Ambition
11.4.4 ISO 14067
11.4.5 The ILCD Handbook
11.4.6 PAS 2050
11.4.7 Material Carbon Footprint
11.4.8 Biogenic Carbon Storage
11.5 Life Cycle Assessment
11.5.1 History of LCA
11.6 Life Cycle Valuation of Biobased Materials
11.7 Peripheral Environmental Consequence
11.8 Temporary Carbon Storage Protocol
11.9 Final Waste Management
11.10 Land Usage
11.10.1 Efficiency and Changes in Land Usage
11.10.2 Standing Biomass
11.10.3 Early Impact Evaluation Techniques
11.10.3.1 Water Usage
11.10.3.2 Soil Degradation
11.10.3.3 Biodiversity
11.11 Allocation
11.12 LCA Application of Biobased Materials
11.12.1 Animal Feed Production
11.12.2 Feedstock Distribution and Transportation
11.12.3 Processing and Conversion of Feedstock
11.12.4 Product Distribution and Transportation
11.12.5 Product´s Purpose and Future
11.13 Challenges in LCA Application
11.14 Conclusions and Outlook
11.15 Future Perspective
References

Citation preview

Shakeel Ahmed   Editor

Biobased Packaging Materials

Sustainable Alternative to Conventional Packaging Materials

Biobased Packaging Materials

Shakeel Ahmed Editor

Biobased Packaging Materials Sustainable Alternative to Conventional Packaging Materials

Editor Shakeel Ahmed Department of Chemistry Government Degree College Mendhar Poonch, Jammu and Kashmir, India

ISBN 978-981-99-6049-1 ISBN 978-981-99-6050-7 https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-6050-7

(eBook)

# The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2023 This work is subject to copyright. All rights are solely and exclusively licensed by the Publisher, whether the whole or part of the material is concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission or information storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar methodology now known or hereafter developed. The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use. The publisher, the authors, and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in this book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publisher nor the authors or the editors give a warranty, expressed or implied, with respect to the material contained herein or for any errors or omissions that may have been made. The publisher remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. This Springer imprint is published by the registered company Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. The registered company address is: 152 Beach Road, #21-01/04 Gateway East, Singapore 189721, Singapore Paper in this product is recyclable.

This book is dedicated to my AMMA whose unconditional love and support always encourages me to do my best and my PAPA who sacrificed his life for us.

Foreword

Finding creative solutions to lessen the negative effects of human activity on the environment is now essential because environmental problems cannot be denied. The book Biobased Packaging Materials is an outstanding and current examination of one such approach that has the potential to revolutionize the packaging industry and promote a more sustainable future for generations to come. The editors and authors of the book take us on an engrossing tour of the world of biobased materials, showing its potential as a convincing solution to the environmental issues caused by conventional packaging techniques. They give us a thorough understanding of the elements, properties, and uses of bioplastics, polysaccharides, proteins, and other biobased products made from renewable resources. We learn more about these biobased materials’ subtleties as we explore their enormous potential for reducing the environmental impact of packaging. These materials offer a potent armament in our fight against pollution and waste because of their much lower carbon footprint and intrinsic biodegradability. A closed-loop system that lays the path for a circular economy and a more sustainable approach to resource consumption is also highlighted in the book as one of their recycling capabilities. In addition to highlighting the environmental advantages of adopting these substitutes, Biobased Packaging Materials offers a careful analysis of their wider ramifications. The authors go in-depth on sustainability, highlighting how biobased packaging materials provide a solution to reduce resource waste—the key elements of a sustainable future. We may actively move away from our reliance on finite resources and toward a regenerative model that promotes harmony between human endeavors and environment by implementing these alternatives. The edited volume also covers discussions of food interaction laws and safety. Biobased Packaging Materials provides a hope and knowledge to make better choices today that will have a significant impact on the future. It sparks our imagination, paints a picture of a world moving away from the burdens of waste and pollution, and provides the foundation for a more wealthy and sustainable future. I congratulate the editor and authors for their outstanding work in producing this insightful and stimulating volume. Their commitment to promote biobased products

vii

viii

Foreword

is commendable and may be crucial for spurring constructive change in businesses and communities toward use of biobased packaging. Let’s work together to realize the potential of biobased materials and pave the way for an era in which responsibility, creativity, and sustainability will be the best policy. Utilization of Lipids—Polymers/Materials Chemistry Group, Department of Agricultural, Food and Nutritional Science, University of Alberta Edmonton, AB, Canada

Aman Ullah

Preface

Climate change, pollution, and depletion of natural resources are pressing global environmental issues. As the urgency of these issues increases, the need for sustainable alternatives becomes more apparent. In the domain of packaging, a crucial aspect of contemporary society, it is essential to seek out innovative solutions that can reduce environmental impact and pave the way for a more sustainable future. This book seeks to shed light on the remarkable potential of biobased materials as a viable and environmentally friendly alternative to conventional packaging materials. By utilizing the power of nature, we have the opportunity to transform the packaging of products, thereby reducing waste, decreasing our reliance on fossil fuels, and preserving our irreplaceable ecosystems. This book takes us on a journey through the intriguing world of bioplastics, and other biobased materials. We investigate their composition, properties, and the complex processes that transform renewable resources into packaging materials with functional properties. To provide a thorough comprehension of this rapidly evolving field, the scientific principles underlying their production as well as the most recent technological developments are thoroughly examined. Through extensive research and analysis, the environmental benefits of biobased packaging materials are uncovered. Their reduced carbon footprint, biodegradability, and recycling potential make them an attractive option for those in search of sustainable packaging solutions. We delve into case studies, analyze life cycle assessments, and present empirical evidence to demonstrate the environmental benefits of biobased materials in this book. However, the transition to biobased packaging materials is not without obstacles. We address crucial factors such as environmental and human health impact, safety regulations, and consumer acceptance. By examining these factors, the authors provide industry professionals, policymakers, and researchers seeking to navigate the complexities of implementing biobased packaging solutions with practical insights and guidance. I believe that this book will be a useful resource for anyone seeking knowledge and motivation to contribute to a more sustainable world. It opens up new opportunities for innovation, collaboration, and responsible decision-making by

ix

x

Preface

investigating the potential of biobased materials. Together, we can make a significant contribution to shaping a future in which packaging materials adhere to environmental stewardship principles. I’d like to thank all the authors for their contributions to this volume, as well as Springer Nature for publishing it. Poonch, India Winter, 2023

Shakeel Ahmed

Contents

1

Food Biopackaging for Human Benefits: Status and Perspectives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Amol D. Gholap, Sampada D. Sawant, Sadikali F. Sayyad, Navnath T. Hatvate, Machindra Chavan, Satish Rojekar, and Md Faiyazuddin

2

Processing of Biobased Packaging Materials . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . J. O. Olusanya, T. P. Mohan, and K. Kanny

3

Potential of PHA (Polyhydroxyalkanoates) Polymers as Packaging Materials: From Concept to Commercialization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Roohi, Naushin Bano, Anamika Gupta, Mohd Haris Siddiqui, and Mohd Rehan Zaheer

1

37

67

4

Applications of Cellulose in Biobased Food Packaging Systems . . . . 101 Priyanka Gupta, Neelam, Kalpana Baghel, Versha Sharma, and Zaffar Azam

5

Starch for Packaging Materials . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 125 Soumeia Zeghoud, Shakeel Ahmed, Ilham Ben Amor, Hadia Hemmami, Asma Ben Amor, and Abdelatif Aouadi

6

Chitin and Chitosan for Packaging Materials . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 147 Tanima Bhattacharya, Pooja Mittal, Tanmoy Das, Smriti Verma, and Lakshay Sharma

7

Natural Antioxidants from Fruit By-products for Active Packaging Applications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 163 Xiaoyu Luo

8

Bionanocomposites for Packaging Materials . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 193 Maria de Lara P. M. Arguelho and Luiz Pereira da Costa

9

Environmental Impact of Biobased Materials . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 213 Çisem Kırbıyık Kurukavak and Mütahire Tok

xi

xii

Contents

10

Safety and Associated Legislation of Selected Food Contact Bio-Based Packaging . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 247 Anele Sithole and Shalini Singh

11

Life Cycle Analysis of Biobased Material . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 279 Tanvir Arfin, Nikhila Mathew, and Pabitra Mondal

Editor and Contributors

About the Editor Shakeel Ahmed PhD is working as an Assistant Professor of Chemistry at Higher Education Department, Government of Jammu and Kashmir, and Assistant Professor at the Department of Chemistry, Government Degree College Mendhar, Jammu and Kashmir, India. He obtained a first degree in general science from Government Postgraduate College Rajouri (University of Jammu) followed by a master’s degree and a doctoral degree in chemistry from Jamia Millia Islamia, a central university, New Delhi. He gained postdoctoral experience in biocomposite materials at Indian Institute of Technology, Delhi. He has published several research publications in the area of green nanomaterials and biopolymers for various applications including biomedical, packaging, and water treatment. He is a regular member of American Chemical Society (ACS), USA, a member of Royal Society of Chemistry (MRSC), UK, a member of International Association of Advanced Materials (IAAM), Sweden, and a life member of Asian Polymer Association and Society of Materials Chemistry (India). He is an active reviewer and a member of the editorial board of many reputed journals. He has published more than 30 books in the area of nanomaterials and green materials with publishers of international repute. His name has been listed among the top 2% scientists of the world published by Stanford University consequently for the last three years. He is a fellow of the Linnean Society of London and the International Society for Development and Sustainability (ISDS), Japan, and the recipient of many awards from different agencies.

Contributors Shakeel Ahmed Department of Chemistry, Government Degree College Mendhar, Poonch, Jammu and Kashmir, India Asma Ben Amor Department of Process Engineering and Petrochemical, Faculty of Technology, University of El Oued, El Oued, Algeria Renewable Energy Development Unit in Arid Zones (UDERZA), University of El Oued, El Oued, Algeria xiii

xiv

Editor and Contributors

Ilham Ben Amor Department of Process Engineering and Petrochemical, Faculty of Technology, University of El Oued, El Oued, Algeria Renewable Energy Development Unit in Arid Zones (UDERZA), University of El Oued, El Oued, Algeria Abdelatif Aouadi Applied Sciences Faculty, Process Engineering Laboratory, KASDI Merbah-Ouargla University, Ouargla, Algeria Tanvir Arfin Air Pollution Control Division, CSIR-National Environmental Engineering Research Institute (CSIR-NEERI), Nagpur, India Maria de Lara P. M. Arguelho Environmental Chemistry Laboratory, São Cristóvão, Sergipe, Brazil Department of Chemistry (DQI), Federal University of Sergipe (UFS), São Cristóvão, Sergipe, Brazil Zaffar Azam Department of Zoology, Dr. Harisingh Gour Vishwavidyalaya (A Central University), Sagar, Madhya Pradesh, India Kalpana Baghel Department of Zoology, Dr. Harisingh Gour Vishwavidyalaya (A Central University), Sagar, Madhya Pradesh, India Naushin Bano Protein Research Laboratory, Department of Bioengineering, Integral University, Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh, India Tanima Bhattacharya Nondestructive Bio-Sensing Laboratory, Department of Biosystems Machinery Engineering College of Agriculture and Life Science, Chungnam National University, Yuseong-Gu Daejeon, Republic of Korea Machindra Chavan Department of Pharmacognosy, Amrutvahini College of Pharmacy, Sangamner, Maharashtra, India Luiz Pereira da Costa Department of Chemistry (DQI), Federal University of Sergipe (UFS), São Cristóvão, Sergipe, Brazil Laboratory of Nanotechnology and Functional Materials (LANanMF), São Cristóvão, Sergipe, Brazil Graduate Program in Chemistry (PPGQ), São Cristóvão, Sergipe, Brazil Tanmoy Das School of System Semiconductor Engineering, Yonsei University, Seoul, Republic of Korea Md Faiyazuddin School of Pharmacy, Al-Karim University, Katihar, Bihar, India Amol D. Gholap Department of Pharmaceutics, St. John Institute of Pharmacy and Research, Palghar, Maharashtra, India Department of Pharmaceutics, Amrutvahini College of Pharmacy, Sangamner, Maharashtra, India Anamika Gupta Department of Chemistry, Aligarh Muslim University, Aligarh, Uttar Pradesh, India

Editor and Contributors

xv

Priyanka Gupta Department of Zoology, Dr. Harisingh Gour Vishwavidyalaya (A Central University), Sagar, Madhya Pradesh, India Navnath T. Hatvate Institute of Chemical Technology Mumbai, Jalna, Maharashtra, India Hadia Hemmami Department of Process Engineering and Petrochemical, Faculty of Technology, University of El Oued, El Oued, Algeria Renewable Energy Development Unit in Arid Zones (UDERZA), University of El Oued, El Oued, Algeria K. Kanny Composite Research Group (CRG), Department of Mechanical Engineering, Durban University of Technology, Durban, South Africa Çisem Kırbıyık Kurukavak Department of Chemical Engineering, Konya Technical University, Konya, Turkey Xiaoyu Luo Food Science and Technology Program, BNU–HKBU United International College, Zhuhai, Guangdong, China Nikhila Mathew Air Pollution Control Division, CSIR-National Environmental Engineering Research Institute (CSIR-NEERI), Nagpur, India Pooja Mittal Chitkara College of Pharmacy, Chitkara University, Rajpura, Punjab, India T. P. Mohan Composite Research Group (CRG), Department of Mechanical Engineering, Durban University of Technology, Durban, South Africa Pabitra Mondal Air Pollution Control Division, CSIR-National Environmental Engineering Research Institute (CSIR-NEERI), Nagpur, India Neelam Department of Zoology, Dr. Harisingh Gour Vishwavidyalaya (A Central University), Sagar, Madhya Pradesh, India J. O. Olusanya Composite Research Group (CRG), Department of Mechanical Engineering, Durban University of Technology, Durban, South Africa Satish Rojekar Department of Pharmacological Sciences, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY, USA Roohi Protein Research Laboratory, Department of Bioengineering, Integral University, Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh, India Sampada D. Sawant Department of Pharmaceutics, St. John Institute of Pharmacy and Research, Palghar, Maharashtra, India Sadikali F. Sayyad Department of Pharmaceutics, Amrutvahini College of Pharmacy, Sangamner, Maharashtra, India Lakshay Sharma Chitkara College of Pharmacy, Chitkara University, Rajpura, Punjab, India

xvi

Editor and Contributors

Versha Sharma Department of Zoology, Dr. Harisingh Gour Vishwavidyalaya (A Central University), Sagar, Madhya Pradesh, India Mohd Haris Siddiqui Protein Research Laboratory, Department of Bioengineering, Integral University, Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh, India Shalini Singh Durban University of Technology, Durban, South Africa Anele Sithole Durban University of Technology, Durban, South Africa Mütahire Tok Department of Chemical Engineering, Konya Technical University, Konya, Turkey Smriti Verma Chitkara College of Pharmacy, Chitkara University, Rajpura, Punjab, India Mohd Rehan Zaheer Department of Chemistry, R.M.P.S.P. Girls Post Graduate College, Basti, Uttar Pradesh, India Soumeia Zeghoud Department of Process Engineering and Petrochemical, Faculty of Technology, University of El Oued, El Oued, Algeria Renewable Energy Development Unit in Arid Zones (UDERZA), University of El Oued, El Oued, Algeria

1

Food Biopackaging for Human Benefits: Status and Perspectives Amol D. Gholap , Sampada D. Sawant, Sadikali F. Sayyad, Navnath T. Hatvate, Machindra Chavan, Satish Rojekar, and Md Faiyazuddin

Abstract

Food products are usually obtained from plant and animal origin, helping humans to provide essential nutrients. Every living organism’s cell responds to assimilated foods to generate energy, stimulate growth, and maintain wellbeing. But food comes with specific shelf life and hence requires proper preservation to retain its quality and properties for an extended period of use. The food packaging materials and structure are essential for food quality and customer safety. Many contemporary packaging techniques are used to meet the requirements of agricultural product exports and increased competition in the A. D. Gholap (✉) Department of Pharmaceutics, St. John Institute of Pharmacy and Research, Palghar, Maharashtra, India Department of Pharmaceutics, Amrutvahini College of Pharmacy, Sangamner, Maharashtra, India S. D. Sawant Department of Pharmaceutics, St. John Institute of Pharmacy and Research, Palghar, Maharashtra, India S. F. Sayyad Department of Pharmaceutics, Amrutvahini College of Pharmacy, Sangamner, Maharashtra, India N. T. Hatvate Institute of Chemical Technology Mumbai, Jalna, Maharashtra, India M. Chavan Department of Pharmacognosy, Amrutvahini College of Pharmacy, Sangamner, Maharashtra, India S. Rojekar Department of Pharmacological Sciences, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY, USA M. Faiyazuddin School of Pharmacy, Al-Karim University, Katihar, Bihar, India # The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2023 S. Ahmed (ed.), Biobased Packaging Materials, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-6050-7_1

1

2

A. D. Gholap et al.

food industry. Many packaging issues are raised due to irrational implementation of the materials and other resources, which seriously impact the environment and human health. The increase in resistance to the microbes attacking food products during storage and low competitiveness among the food packaging materials have induced significant issues of inadequate packaging, which must be addressed by food biopackaging techniques. Biopack contains edible film, edible coatings, and primary and secondary packaging materials. Many edible packaging materials are prepared with synthetic polymers inducing negative environmental impacts to limit their applications. The utilisation of the digital logistic system significantly contributes to food preservation but requires skilled personnel and demands high-cost operation. The biodegradable components used to make the edible ingredients, such as starch, cellulose, whey, gluten, or biobased monomers of polylactic acids, are easily acquired from natural sources. These products ensure food safety and can recycle tensile properties and physiochemical qualities for human benefit. This review summarises manufacturing operations, essential properties, raw materials, and regulations by concerned authorities for the practical application of biopackaging materials. It will help researchers in this domain to work on more efficient biopackaging material as a true panacea for food preservation in the near future. Keywords

Biodegradable · Biopackaging · Food · Polymer · Safety · Starch

1.1

Introduction

The creation of compostable bags to slightly replace petrochemical-based materials is affected by concerns about the environment as well as food safety. This overview aims to provide current information on the latest developments in biodegradable packaging products as well as the function of digital and nanotechnology in the same. Flour, gelatin, cellulose, chitosan, and polylactic acid are a few examples of typical biodegradable substances. The selection of the food packing materials is influenced by many factors like mechanical properties and solubility. The degradation rate, resistance to wear, and water permeation also played a significant role into the same. Bioassimilation as well as microbial enzymatic reactions can decompose biodegradable films in soil. Combined films with nanoparticles are used to enhance the functionality of packing materials. With the use of virtual networks, including sensing devices for the authentication and monitoring of food and packaging goods, the potential of the fourth industrial revolution can be achieved. A study gap exists in creating a sort of the hybrid sensor type for the system unit. It combines a sampling headspace (SHS), along with the detection system, as well as big data processing for volatiles derived from heterogeneous tomatoes. Some of the popular statistical methods for data processing of sensor systems include artificial neutral networks (ANN). The linear discriminant analysis (LDA) is also involved into it. The principal

1

Food Biopackaging for Human Benefits: Status and Perspectives

3

component analysis (PCA) is also playing a significant role for the same. Population growth, development, dietary diversity, and environmental change all place strain on the availability of fresh produce after harvest. During the postharvest period, there is a significant loss of fresh produce. Due to their high moisture level, fresh vegetables, including tomato fruit, are perishable. The processing, warehousing, and wrapping of fresh food are typically responsible for postharvest losses (30–50%). Tracking and managing losses is challenging due to the mass character of produce throughout the supply chain. However, digital innovations including smart packaging are considered appropriate into monitoring and managing postharvest losses. Such intelligent logistical applications are used in product monitoring programmes based on data that connects the product towards its genetic properties and environmental circumstances. Additionally, IFPRI emphasised how digitalisation targeted at the ecosystem, which involves agricultural output, refining, shipping, and the market economy system, can better the competitiveness and food value chain. This made the idea of implementing digital logistical systems, such as food packing and market assistance, necessary. The option of the application of synthetic polymer is there but it comes with a negative impact on the ecosystem along with the environment. As a result, environmentally friendly shipping materials are progressively being used instead. According to Muller et al. (Zekrehiwot et al. 2017; Muller et al. 2017), starch and polylactic acid are possible substitutes for synthesised polymer films or the plastics are implemented for food packaging as depicted in Fig. 1.1. Additionally, edible biofilms can be created from polysaccharides and are biodegradable, according to Jeevahan et al. A more modern method of creating biodegradable food wrapping that is safe for both individuals and the natural world is the creation of edible biofilms. Furthermore, Guerrini et al. (Guerrini et al. 2017; Jeya Jeevahan et al. 2020) stated that recyclable films possess tensile and physicochemical qualities that can substitute typical polymer plastic uses. However, food industries are dealing with several problems related to government regulations, growing public safety expectations, and environmental degradation. The plastic biopolymers have the lacuna of non-biodegradability, which raised many environmental concerns into the ecosystem. This has led to an increase in the need for biodegradable plastics to replace artificial plastics. The fourth wave of industrialisation is largely based on virtual technology and nanotechnology utilisation into the food supply chain, necessitating further exploration.

1.1.1

Importance of Food Packaging on a Global Platform

The packaging transformation sector along with the packaging supply chain is essential for packaging commercialisation. The retail sector is also vital for commercial viability of packing. The packaging sector had $839 billion in global revenue in 2015 and was expected to expand by 3.5% by 2020. The two regions that use packaging the most are Western Europe and the USA. The South African economy’s packaging sector accounts for 2% of the country’s GDP. The packaging

4

A. D. Gholap et al.

Fig. 1.1 The increase in the population, change in environment, and dietary diversity across the globe demand for food supply every day in the market. Post-harvesting, food preservation becomes tedious due to moisture attack, which was addressed by using conventional materials for processing and wrapping and can be helpful to provide 30–40% food protection. The application of synthetic polymer is limited due to environmental issues. In this case, the edible biofilms are handy, providing public safety, ensuring food quality retention, and successfully implemented in significant supply chain sectors

materials are considered as the serious elements owing to ocean pollution, plastic pollution along with the food loss. Some of the other factors contributing for the same are climate change, sustainable transport along with food waste. These factors are also very important for the selection of new techniques for food packaging. Food packaging protects and preserves food by creating a physical shield against contaminants brought on by outside objects and environmental variables. In the end, this helps food products stay fresher for longer. Physical and mechanical durability, accessibility, and transparency through product labelling are additional purposes. Food processors, farmers, merchants, and researchers are among the

1

Food Biopackaging for Human Benefits: Status and Perspectives

5

participants in the value chain for food packaging. Packaging food as part of a postharvest loss-reduction strategy along the distribution chain increases life span, revenue, lifestyle, and food and nutrition security. Consumer demands for accessibility, prepared food, shelf durability, and preserving food quality are driving the latest events in new food packaging (Chisenga et al. 2020). The plastic polymers are used for food packaging due to their advantages offered by them for manufacturing ease and ease of accessibility. One of the great issues that is more concerning apart from their advantages is the poor degradation of the polymer including petroleum polymers. Similarly, landfilled polymer plastics may take longer than 20 years to degrade without losing any of their plastic characteristics, according to Webb et al. (O’Brine and Thompson 2010; Webb et al. 2012). Thus, efforts are being made to replace plastic from petroleum with biodegradable ones. According to reports, food packaging has evolved from recyclable, biodegradable, and compostable to smart and active packaging. Also, the choice and use of novel packaging are influenced by its barrier capabilities, compatibility with materials, and life span extension properties (Mahalik and Nambiar 2010; Ivanković et al. 2017). Safety concerns for the environment are constraining the use of plastic films in packing mostly in food sectors. As a result, biopolymer films are gaining popularity because of their recyclable qualities.

1.2

Biodegradable Packaging

While market data for Africa is underdeveloped, the use of biodegradable materials is gaining traction globally, especially in many marketplaces. This change has increased in the range of 15–20% CAGR from 2012 to 2017 (Fahim 2019). According to Atarés and Chiralt (Atarés and Chiralt 2016), essential oils were implemented for the production of biobased food packaging offering antioxidants along with antimicrobial properties. The essential oil offers excellent physical along with mechanical properties to food packaging materials. It also reduces water vapour permeability for hydrophilic compounds, enhancing visual properties. Some studies have shown that this type of food packaging has successfully increased the shelf life of the food products (KANTOLA and HELÉN 2001). Some of the researchers have implemented gum arabic for the production of coating film for the proper preservation of tomatoes and have demonstrated enhanced shelf life of the packed products (Ali et al. 2010). The application of starch films was done as a food pack for Colombian potatoes, resulting in the reduction of the respiration rate of the same by 27% (Medina-Jaramillo et al. 2019). The increment into the physical strength of biodegradable films can be done by the application of petroleum polyfilms. According to Sanaa and Medimagh (Sanaa and Medimagh 2019), there are several biomass resources in Africa which may be utilised to make biodegradable and biopolymers, including cotton fibres from South Africa, Nigeria, Algeria, Botswana, Kenya, Ethiopia, and Uganda; Washingtonia filifera in Algeria; Luffa cylindrica in Uganda. Biopolymers such as cellulose, pectin, and chitosan have received attention

6

A. D. Gholap et al.

Fig. 1.2 Essential oils are used in the food pack, giving antimicrobial and antioxidant properties. They are also helpful in enhancing the physical, mechanical, and visual qualities of packing films. The higher lipid composition implemented into the same ensured lesser water permeation and more remarkable food preservation. The biopolymers are also used to apply acetylation reaction to get materials from natural sources added with protein and polysaccharides. These processes take care of the structural framework of the packaging materials for efficient film protection to the added food products

from the food packaging industry and the scientific community (Sanaa and Medimagh 2019) (Fig. 1.2). Some reports indicated that recyclable plastic film is produced extensively in Nigeria by combining cassava starch as well as biodegradable polymer ingredients. Some of the researchers have reported loss of fresh fruits occurred due to poor packaging precautions and materials implemented for the same (Sibomana et al. 2016). Yet, using biodegradable cartons of different-sized, bulk containers and plastic bags helped commercial or beginning farmers avoid postharvest losses.

1

Food Biopackaging for Human Benefits: Status and Perspectives

7

Biopolymers such as starch, gelatin, bio-derived monomers like polylactic acid and cellulose are used to make the food packaging film (Abdul Khalil et al. 2018). Bacteria form compounds, including xanthan, cellulose, and pullulan. The natural polymer chitosan is produced by deacetylating chitin, and it provides very useful properties of safety, palatability along with biodegradability. It is considered as the second most prevalent type of the biopolymer used in the food market after cellulose. It is advised to add several types of chemicals to the biodegradable film to increase its quality (Suyatma et al. 2004; Jiménez et al. 2010). Proteins or polysaccharides are examples of hydrophilic constituent materials that can be used to stabilise edible biodegradable films. The coating or production of the film is required to be done by the application of aqueous dispersions consisting of the cation film formers. The drying process in implemented after this process. The mixture is created by homogenising or emulsifying processes. The dispersion phase consists of essential oils that are added for film formation. The resulting polymer gets dried which acts as the structural framework to that of the film along with lipid droplets. Several hydrocolloids including fatty acids, proteins along with polysaccharides are implemented for the same process (Jiménez et al. 2010). According to a review by Ivankovic et al. (Ivanković et al. 2017), biodegradable polymers can be produced in three phases, each of which can be used to create biodegradable food packaging materials. Low-density polyethylene (LDPE) film and starch filters at a concentration of 5–15% make up the first generation polymer film. The oxidative additives were also used in the same. The second generation polymer film contains LDPE along with hydrophilic copolymers that are used as the additives for the same. The pregelatinised starch is also used in it while the concentration of the same would be 40–70%. The third generation of the film contains many biomaterials and sourced from three categories. The first category of materials contains polymeric materials like biomass, starch, chitosan along with soyabean. Plant proteins along with chitin are also used in the first category of the materials. The second category of materials contains bioderived type of monomeric units like polylactate while the third category of materials consists of naturally derived biomonomers or materials obtained from genetically altered organisms. In comparison to plastic food packaging, nanocomposite substances have been shown to have excellent properties such as environmental friendliness, lightweight, and high performance. Among the advantageous factors that apply to thermoplastic starch-based materials for food packaging are their cost-effectiveness, environmentally friendly nature, and availability. Glycerol, Gum arabic, jojoba wax, and soybean gum coating on fruits caused prolonged weight loss, hardness alterations, and titratable acidity variations, including tomato softening (El-Anany et al. 2009; Khan et al. 2017; Youssef and El-Sayed 2018). The application of the semipermeable barrier is excellent for protection from oxygen, water, and carbon dioxide on food contents. Such types of membrane will take care of the oxidation reaction rate, respiration along with the water loss. This can be achieved by the application of the gum arabic, edible coating formation by whey protein along with glycerol. When cherry tomatoes were stored, the chitosan colloids with grapefruit seed extract (0.5–1%) film inhibited Salmonella (de Jesús Salas-Méndez et al. 2019; Won et al. 2018; Azmai et al. 2019).

8

1.2.1

A. D. Gholap et al.

Edible Coating Preservation Mechanism for Food Products

Fruit quality deterioration results from biological pathways affecting intracellular components, cell wall content, and cytoskeleton. Two necessary cell wall hydrolase enzymes, polygalacturonase and cellulase, were identified as being associated with the ripening and softening of foods and fruits (Lombardelli et al. 2020). Edible films on fruits delay ripening by increasing intracellular CO2 levels and reducing O2 permeability. High concentrations can suppress cell wall hydrolase enzyme activity and preserve hardness throughout storage. This impact of a low-oxygen atmosphere is easily employed to improve both transportation and storage conditions and increase the shelf lifespan of many fruit products. The antibacterial qualities of edible films help shield the fruit from firmness-degrading organisms like mites and insects (Cukrov 2018; Nottagh et al. 2020) (Causse et al. 2020) that transport bacterial and fungal pathogens and can deteriorate and soften packed contents. Many fruits and foods like tomatoes, among other fruits, include biodegradable packing components that can be broken down by soil microbes as presented in Fig. 1.3 (Gharezi and Gharezi 2012; Huang et al. 2016).

1.2.2

Overview of Biodegradation of Biodegradable Films

Biodegradable substances, including subunits like carboxylic acid, alcohol, and amine can be broken down by soil microbes into natural elements like water, CO2, and methane. Chemical make-up, bonding types, and moisture accessibility all influence biodegradability. Carbonyl signals in IR spectra indicate the metabolic decomposition of starch into maltose (a disaccharide) and sugar (a monosaccharide). Enzymatic activity underlies the microbial action. The microscopic organisms develop saprophytically and use metabolites generated from plants as their substrates. The cellulases and amylases secreted by the bacteria are what cause the metabolic hydrolytic and oxidative degradation of glycosidic linkages in cellulose and starch. The labile aliphatic ester connections of plasticising coatings are degraded by hydrolytic enzymes such lipase, cutinase, and esterase (Bhatnagar et al. 2018; Tai et al. 2019). As a result of these enzymatic reactions, metabolites are produced, which microbes then take up to meet their energy needs. This is seen by the gradual decline and removal of carbonyl signals in IR spectra over time. Substantial carbonyl peaks were observed by Tai et al. (2019) in the first 30 days and a decline after day 45, which indicated the breakdown of starch/cellulose and the absorption of compounds. Chitosan depolymerisation by enzyme revealed a sudden growth in sugars throughout 15 h and a decrease in the rate for 15–24 h (Affes et al. 2020). The slower metabolite decline indicates the saprophytic phase. In addition to breaking up polymer chains, UV light irradiation with a less than 350 nm wavelength can also speed up enzyme activity. In comparison to UV therapy (23%) during 7 weeks, cellulase enzyme treatment destroyed cellulose acetate by 60% (Prajapat et al. 2016). Thermalgravimetric study (TGA) is frequently used to characterise biodegradation,

1

Food Biopackaging for Human Benefits: Status and Perspectives

9

Fig. 1.3 The edible film used to preserve food products is handy due to its ability to increase the accumulation of intracellular carbon dioxide. It also decreases oxygen permeability and hence increases the food product’s lifespan throughout the storage and supply chain transportation. The high accumulation of carbon dioxide induces the suppression of the cell wall hydrolase enzyme activity to preserve food hardness during storage. The antimicrobial properties in the edible films shield food from getting degraded by insects and microorganisms

which results in three parts of degradation profiles. The first stage of degeneration is linked to the loss of moisture and volatile compounds, the second phase with the formation of smaller, lighter subunits of starch, and the third phase with the breakdown of starch elements (Medina-Jaramillo et al. 2019). The bacterial growth in soil and water, the hydrophilic nature of the plasticiser, the sample’s surface area, crystallinity, molecular mass, and temperature all have a role in the biodegradation film breakdown. Plasticisers speed up the interaction of polar functional groups with water while boosting the quantity of polar functional groups and water permeability inside the specimens (Parra et al. 2006). In addition to having superior surface/ interface action, including biocompatibility, plasticisers of the biosurfactant type

10

A. D. Gholap et al.

also have increased soil hydrocarbon microbial degradation by decreasing the tension at the interface between water and the soil (Huang et al. 2016; Mnif et al. 2017). At an ideal pH of 10, under controlled fermentation conditions, increased quantities of metabolites, including volatile fatty acids, were demonstrated (Mnif et al. 2017). Higher pH values can prevent acidophilic bacteria from growing, which in turn restricts the generation of metabolites. The zein-chitosan-poly(vinyl alcohol) film treated with pulsed electric fields demonstrated improved stability against electrolyte and enzyme breakdown (Giteru et al. 2020).

1.2.3

The Properties of Biodegradable Films Essential for Food Biopack

1.2.3.1 Impact of Structural Properties Atomic force microscopy (AFM) and Fourier transform infrared (FT-IR) spectrometry may be employed to analyse packaging substances’ chemical makeup. Starch’s amorphous and crystalline forms have been evaluated and quantified using the X-ray diffraction method. The amylopectin molecule has a high correlation with crystallinity. Most of the amylose in the starch granule is located in the amorphous lamellae, while the amylopectin produces the crystallised lamellae. Crystallinity affects dispersion properties, including starch swelling in plasticisers (Zhang et al. 2016; Chisenga et al. 2019). The interaction of chemical bonds with IR radiations is a typical way to describe the IR spectrum. Due to the vibrational stretching of the hydroxyl (–OH) groups coupled inter- and intrachain, the IR spectrum of starch revealed a broad range. The peaks corresponded to carbonyl (C=O) groups bonded to the glucose ring, while the narrow bands were connected to the stretched C-H bonds. Transmission electron microscopy and scanning electron microscopy were used to study the microscopic surface studies of the coating layer (Brandelero et al. 2011; Vaezi et al. 2019; Hammami et al. 2020). The surfaces of the PVA and starch films were uniform and polished. When the degree of crystallinity fluctuated, the crosssection of the films exhibited highly diverse and irregular (bubble-like) patterns. Due to poor miscibility, disparities in crystallinity, and the extraction process, the film mixes (PVA/starch) are indicative of microstructure phase transition. In order to prevent phase segregation in blended films, compatibiliser substances like poly (ethylene glycol) and formaldehyde are blended with the films. The percentage of phosphate groups and starch in the amylopectin chain is one variable impacting phase segregation. Due to the larger amount of phosphate groups than some other native starches, potato starch film failed to show phase segregation. SEM measurements of the films’ thickness were reported, and film mixtures revealed greater thickness than unadulterated starch. The variations in molar mass were what caused the thickness differences. Thickness increased with increasing molecular mass (Liu et al. 2020; Shojaee Kang Sofla et al. 2020).

1

Food Biopackaging for Human Benefits: Status and Perspectives

11

1.2.3.2 Contribution of Permeability Properties For food products to last longer on the shelf, the polymer matrix needs to have effective gas permeability. Transport of moisture between the product and the environment has a direct impact on the freshness and lifespan of fruits and vegetables, especially tomatoes. As a result, packaging’s main purpose is to limit the movement of water. The hydrophilic character of polysaccharides was the cause of the weak moisture boundaries in edible coatings. As lipids are naturally hydrophobic, adding them to polysaccharide and chitosan films improves the water vapour barrier characteristics. The presence of the hydrogen bond between NH2 group of the chitosan along with the OH group will increase the hydrophobicity for blended films. Such type of film will help to the reduction of the rate of water transmission. Yu et al. have demonstrated that silica nanoparticles give compostable type of the coatings with the reduction into permeability of the moisture. The PVC, chitosan, and silica can all be added to packing materials to change their oxygen permeability capabilities based on the product’s respiratory needs and the polar molecular make-up of the ingredients. Silica was added to PVA/chitosan biodegradable materials, which resulted in a 26% reduction in oxygen permeability values (Yu et al. 2018). Fresh fruit and vegetables, especially tomatoes, are frequently packaged by implementing equilibrium-modified atmosphere packaging (EMAP). The EMA packaging improves gas transmission qualities depending on the fresh produce’s respiratory needs. The equilibrium of the atmosphere is achieved through the induction of the stable exchange between the consumption of the gases and their generation. So, the equilibrium between the same is required to get established to have proper functioning of the stability of the film. The gas permeation parameters can be modified by using lasers and physical methods for microperforation and macroperforation, respectively. Some of the biopolymers like starch along with polylactic acid are majorly used as alternative biopolymers to conventional ones (Hu et al. 2018). 1.2.3.3 Impact of Mechanical Properties Some of the researcher have explored the application of the recyclable polylactic films by implementing the polylactic acid along with the pea starch. Unlike polylactic petroleum films, biodegradable polylactic film has inferior mechanical and physical properties. Brittle films are often connected with biopolymers like starch. It also consist of hydrophilic plasticisers into film-forming dispersions, including polyols (glycerol, sorbitol, and polyethylene glycol), reduced intermolecular tensions and enhanced polymer mobility, increasing flexibility and flexibility extensibility (Aung et al. 2018; Zhou et al. 2019). Many characteristics of the films including lattice parameters along with the amylose concentration of the polymer are vital for providing attractive properties to the film. The molecular mass properties of the film along with the distribution of the same are important for tensile strength as well as the strainability of the films (Mali et al. 2002). When inter- and intra-molecular hydrogen bonds are formed, plasticising chemicals like cellulose acetate phthalate (CAP) and polyvinyl alcohol (PVA) can alter the mechanical characteristics. Starch and PVA were combined to produce a biocompatible

12

A. D. Gholap et al.

coating with superior tensile characteristics. There are some case studies in which the tensile strength of the pure chitosan film is increased with the help of the nanoZnO along with chitosan CAP film (Indumathi et al. 2019; Gómez-Aldapa et al. 2020). The interplay existed among the film constituent parts is important for the increment into the tensile strength of the film blends. The films’ tensile strengths increased as the amount of diblock copolymer increases. Plasticisers and nanoparticles both increased and lowered elongation at break in starch films, respectively. By combining PLA with plasticisers like polycaprolactone (PCL), hardenability can be reduced. The PLA-PCL blends, however, had weak gaseous permeability, but these may be enhanced using suitable fillers, like well-distributed nanoparticles (Cabedo et al. 2006; Khamhan et al. 2008). There is much scope available for exploration of the nanoparticles utilisation for the increment into the tensile strength of the recyclable polylactic film. The issues of biodegradability of the polylactic acid have increased the prevention of its use into the food business. Other drawbacks include low heat sealability, thermal instability, brittleness, high water vapour and oxygen permeability, and low melting length. Moreover, some biodegradable biopolymers’ hydrophilic character was noted for having a poor water vapour barrier and, subsequently, poor tensile capabilities (Cyras et al. 2007; Rhim et al. 2009; Modi 2010).

1.2.3.4 The Solubility Properties The edible film solubility characteristic is based on the hydrophilic characteristics of the selected polymers. This revealed that the hydrophilicity of a film matrix had deteriorated. The exposure of the hydrophobic character of the film matrix and the consequent decline in water attraction can result from the linked hydrogen and hydroxyl interaction among polymers. However, Pella et al. (Cano et al. 2015; Pellá et al. 2020) observed that potato starch/PVA films had higher water attractions than pure films. The increase in -OH groups was responsible for this. Lower solubility values suggest films with strong stability in an aqueous environment, according to Sajjan et al., and are advised for applications such as packaging, particularly for storing (Sajjan et al. 2020). 1.2.3.5 Optical Properties While light transmission and opacity can be tested using a UV Vis Spectrophotometer, the coloured parameters (L, a, and b), as well as colour difference (E), are frequently quantified utilising the CIE system (Azevedo et al. 2017). The packed foods can become stained and spoiled if they are exposed to UV and visible rays for an extended period of time. This led to have a mandatory requirement of film transparency along with UV protection and many polymers are implemented for the same. Low-density polyethylene films can decrease UV radiation intensity through a filter mechanism. The polypropylene films can be used for the same. Data indicate that the absorption peaks of the nanoparticles loaded blended film are actually higher than that of the pure films. The ability of the film to absorb more UV light is increased due to greater surface area provided by the nanomaterials for the same. Some of the modifications of starch films including involvement of the nanocomposites of ZnO as well as nanoclay act as UV inhibitors for the same.

1

Food Biopackaging for Human Benefits: Status and Perspectives

1.3

13

Exploration of Biobased Polymers

There are three categories of biobased polymers that are present owing to their origin along with the production. These are as follows: Group 1: Polymers extracted directly or taken separately from the biomass. For example, polysaccharides like starch, cellulose, gluten, and casein protein. Group 2: Polymers created using a traditional chemical synthesis method using monomers made from renewable biomass. Monomers of the lactic acid are used for the production of the biopolyester, polylactic acid. The monomers production is done with the help of the carbohydrate substrate, and it is done with the help of the fermentation process. Group 3: Polymers made by microbes or bacteria with genetic modifications. For example, as of now polyhydroxyalkanoates constitute the majority of the category of polymers implemented for biopackaging. Research is ongoing for the development of bacterial cellulose as a food biopackaging material but currently it is in the development phase. Generally, biobased polymers have more complex side chain chemistry and design than traditional plastics made using mineral oil, allowing material scientists unique customising options for the qualities of the finished product. The following points will provide an overview of the most popular biobased packaging and polymeric materials (Guilbert et al. 1996; Krochta and De MulderJohnston 1997; Müller et al. 1998; Chandra 1998; Petersen et al. 1999).

1.3.1

Group One: Polymers Directly Obtained from Biomass

The naturally occurring category one polymers, which are the most widely available, are obtained from agricultural and marine animals as well as plants. Examples include polysaccharides like starch, chitin, and cellulose as well as proteins like casein, collagen, whey, and soy. Each of these polymers is somewhat crystalline and hydrophilic in nature, which causes performance and processing issues, particularly regarding the packaging of humid materials. Yet, these polymers create materials with superior gas barriers.

1.3.1.1 Polysaccharides The main polysaccharides of concern for the creation of materials up to this point were starch, cellulose, chitosan, and gums. Future interest will probably centre on the more complicated polysaccharides of fungi along with the bacteria. There is also scope of the involvement of xanthan, pulan along with hyaluronic acid for the same. 1.3.1.2 Starch and Its Derivatives Starch, the polysaccharide used as storage in legumes, tubers, and cereals, is a renewable raw resource. There are some of lacunas present in starch which make it inefficient for providing better mechanical properties including excellent tensile strength and good elongation. Such high score properties are required for any packaging materials. So, many other methods like material blending, chemical

14

A. D. Gholap et al.

modification along with plasticisation are used for the effective utilisation of starch as a packaging material. Starch has been employed in a number of techniques for creating biodegradable plastics since it is competitive internationally with petroleum. The brittleness of blends with high starch concentrations is a problem for the production of starch materials. By using plasticisers which are biodegradable, it is possible to overcome the fragility of starch by obtaining 100% biodegradability in mixtures. There are many plasticisers used in the film formation and hydrophilic polymers were implemented for the same. The main application of the plasticiser was the reduction in water activity, which results in the inhibition of microbes. Starch is transformed into a thermoplastic substance when processed in an extruder using mechanical and thermal energy. Plasticisers are intended to efficiently minimise the intermolecular hydrogen bonding and offer stability to the product qualities in the manufacturing of thermoplastic starch. The hydrophilic nature of the starch is used for the modification of the functionality of the extruded material. Substantial changes in the water content occurred after processing with starch. The issues surrounding starch are addressed by implementing a wide range of distinct starch analogues; most recently, reports of site-selective alterations have been made. Formulations appropriate for blowing films and installation moulding are created by blending with polymers with an even more hydrophobic nature. There is a compatibility issue.

1.3.1.3 Cellulose and Derivatives The planet’s most prevalent naturally occurring polymer, cellulose, is an almost linear polymer of anhydrous glucose. Since it has a consistent structure and a variety of hydroxyl groups, it typically generates fibres and crystalline microfibrils that are firmly hydrogen bound, which is commonly presented in the form of paper or that of the cardboard used for packaging. While some basic food packaging uses waxed or polyethylene-coated paper, the majority of paper is used for secondary packaging. Due to its insolubility, hydrophilic properties, and crystal structures, cellulose is a cheapest raw material yet challenging to use. The cellophane or cellulose film is created from the cellulose with the help of the sodium hydroxide along with carbon disulphide. The resulting cellophane has excellent tensile qualities but seems to be water sensitive due to its high hydrophilicity. One of the issues present in it is that the resulted polymer is not a thermoplastic polymer and hence such type of the packaging material cannot be heat sealed. The application of cellophane and nitrocellulose wax and polyvinylidene chloride is done for the enhancement of the barrier properties of the selected packaging materials. In this form, it is used to package processed meat, baked foods, chocolates, and cheese. Yet, as the current product is problematic in both ways, there is a big opportunity for creating a better cellulose film material or production method. Different types of the cellulose analogues are presented like carboxy methyl cellulose along with cellulose acetate for the same purpose. The application of the methyl cellulose, hydropropyl cellulose, hydroxyethyl cellulose as well as ethyl cellulose can be done for the same. Only cellulose acetate (CA) is often used in packaged foods among these compounds (baked goods and fresh products). CA needs to be plasticised to produce films since

1

Food Biopackaging for Human Benefits: Status and Perspectives

15

it has comparatively poor gas and water barrier characteristics. Although many cellulose derivatives have good film-forming abilities, their cost prevents them from being used in large quantities. This may be a clear indication of the complicated and expensive early derivatisation operations caused by the crystalline nature of cellulose. If this scenario is to change, research is needed to create effective production systems for the creation of cellulose analogues.

1.3.1.4 Chitin/Chitosan Invertebrate exoskeletons contain the naturally existing molecules chitin, which is the second largest common source of polysaccharides after cellulose (Kittur et al. 1998). Chitin is a class of partly N-acetylated 2-deoxy-2-amino-a-glucan polymer formed from 1,4-linked 1,4-deoxy-2-acetoamido-o-D-glucose monomer units, and chitosan is a term for these polymers. Chitosan is generally used as a thickening, clarifier, flocculant, phytopathogens resistance promoter, gas-selective barrier, antibacterial agent, and wound healing activator, among many other things. Chitosan has been frequently utilised to create consumable coatings because it rapidly forms films and generally creates products with a powerful gas barrier (Sandford et al. 1992; Krochta and De Mulder-Johnston 1997). The biobased polymers suffering with gas barrier properties are covered by the chitosan. While before the application of several polysaccharide-based polymers one has to take care of the damp environment. Chitosan’s cationic characteristics provide excellent chances to treat the material and add certain qualities by utilising electron connections between nucleic acids. The integration and/or gradual release of active ingredients may also be accomplished using the cationic ability, expanding the opportunities for the producer to customise the features (Hoagland and Parris 1996). The ability of chitosan and chitin to uptake ions of heavy metals and have antibacterial characteristics is another fascinating characteristic in food packaging (Dawson et al. 1998; Chandra 1998). The first could be useful in terms of food’s microbiological lifespan and quality, and the second might be utilised to reduce oxidative stress in the food that is fuelled by unbound metals. Chitosan has so far attracted the most attention as a packaging material for consumable coatings. The usage of a biocompatible laminate made of polycaprolactone and chitosan-cellulose in the altered atmosphere packaging of fresh fruits has been proven by some researchers (Makino and Hirata 1997). 1.3.1.5 Proteins There are many plant-derived proteins such as gluten and pea available for packaging purposes. Some of the animal-derived proteins like casein, keratin, collagen along with whey are also used for the same. The selected protein material undergoes chemical treatment for use as a effective packaging material. Many papers have extensively discussed edible protein coatings for food packaging, but proteins can also be used to create thermoplastic-producible polymers (De Graaf and Kolster 1998). Materials based on proteins are ideally suited for packaging due to their strong gas permeability. Yet, due to their hydrophilic nature, plastics’ mechanical and gas characteristics, like those of starch, are affected by the surrounding humidity. Apart from keratin, the main disadvantage of all protein-based polymers is that

16

A. D. Gholap et al.

they are sensitive to humidity levels. This obstacle may be overcome with less susceptibility to humidity through mixing or laminating with several other biobased polymers. There hasn’t been much research done in this area thus far.

1.3.1.6 Casein A protein found in milk is called casein. Its irregular coiled structure makes it simple to process. Materials can be processed with the right plasticisers at temperatures between 80 and 100 °C to provide a range of physical characteristics, from rigid and fragile to malleable and robust. Since casein melts are very stretchy, they can be used for film forming. Casein films typically possess an opaque look. Although casein components need not solubilise instantly in water, they recover around 50% of their original weight within 24 h. The primary disadvantage of casein is its comparatively expensive cost. In the 1940s and 1950s, casein was utilised as just a thermoset plastic for brooches. Due to its superior adhesive qualities, it is still used today for bottle labels. 1.3.1.7 Gluten The primary storage protein in both corn and wheat is gluten. Since it can create a viscoelastic batter, wheat is a crucial cereal grain. The gluten get physically processed it develops the disulphide bond. Disulphide bridges oversee generating a robust, elastic, and dense dough. As a result, manufacturing is more challenging than it is with casein because a suitable reducing agent must be used to break down the disulphide bonding in the gluten proteins. Manufacturing temperatures range from 70 to 100 °C depending on the amount of plasticiser present. The range of tensile properties is similar to those found in caseins. In some circumstances, gluten plastics exhibit a high shine (polypropylene-like) and offer excellent water resistance. While submerged, they absorb moisture rather than dissolve in it. Research is currently underway to explore the use of gluten in edible coatings, sealers, or thermoplastics due to its accessibility and low cost. 1.3.1.8 Soy Protein Available on the market, soy proteins come in three forms with varying protein contents: soy isolate, soy flour, and soy concentrate. There are two types of components present in the soy protein including 7S and 11S. The 7S contains 35% of conglycinin while 52% glycinin is present in the 11S. The synthesis of 7S and 11S is thus identical to that of gluten and has comparable physical qualities since both include cysteine by-products that cause the creation of disulphide bonds. The most effective outcomes are achieved using soy isolate, which contains about 90% protein. Soy protein is mentioned in certain early 1900s patents as being used in plastics and adhesives. Indeed, the early Chinese employed soy protein for uses other than food, such as lubricating oil. The use of soy proteins in paper coverings, dyes, and adhesives has been shown to be the most effective.

1

Food Biopackaging for Human Benefits: Status and Perspectives

17

1.3.1.9 Keratin The least expensive protein is, by far, keratin. It can be recovered from waste products, including feathers, hair, and fingernails. Keratin is the most challenging protein to break down due to its complex structure and significant cysteine group concentration. A fully water-insoluble, biodegradable plastic is produced after treatment. When compared to the proteins listed above, mechanical characteristics are still inadequate. One of the major issues of protein packaging materials is humidity responsiveness, which is further countered by lamination or mixing. There is a need for extensive exploration to properly address this issue for effective protein packaging protection. 1.3.1.10 Collagen The collagen consists of the fibrous protein complex which is present in animal body along with skin. Some of repetitive units like proline, glycine along with hydroxyproline are present in skeleton along with tendons. A stretchy polymer, collagen. Nevertheless, collagen is extremely intractable and challenging to digest due to its intricate helical as well as fibrous nature. Gelatine is a typical food ingredient that can produce foam and film. Collagen is the primary basic material used in its manufacturing. Collagen is partially hydrolysed either by acid or alkaline solutions to create gelatine. These procedures cause collagen’s tight, spiral arrangement to break down, releasing water-soluble pieces that could later come together to create films, gels, or light tomes. Although gelatine is a reasonably reproducible material, it has a higher water reactivity. 1.3.1.11 Whey Whey is the by-product obtained from the cheese. It also consist of high content of B-lactoglobulin. These were extensively researched as consumable films and coatings, have a reasonably beneficial nutritional profile, and are widely accessible around the world. A logical use strategy for this protein within packing would seem to be based on this. If appropriate modification procedures can be identified to reduce water sensitivity, whey proteins, like gelatin, can be easily handled and have some prospects as external coatings (Haugaard et al. 2001). 1.3.1.12 Zein The maize endosperm protein class known as “prolamins” includes a protein subclass known as “zein.” The wet milling industry produces a by-product known as zein, which is mostly used for coating foods and medications. Yet, the estimated 375,000 tonnes p.a. global availability of zein necessitates the creation of novel markets and real worth uses. The majority of zein’s industrial applications rely on its long-recognised film-forming capabilities (Shukla 1992; Padua et al. 2000). Moulding, engraving, and extrusion procedures can be used to create films (Reiners et al. 1973; Lai and Padua 1997). The flexibility of the fragile films is countered by the use of plasticisers. There is still ample potential for the application of zein into edible films and renewable packaging (Padua et al. 2000).

18

1.3.2

A. D. Gholap et al.

Group 2: Contribution from Biobased Monomers and Polymers

A large variety of potential “bio-polyesters” are produced when polymers are made using conventional chemical production. One of the ingredients largely used for wide application in commercial sustainable packaging is polylactic acid. Theoretically, all of the current mineral oil-based packaging materials might be replaced in the near future by renewable monomer units obtained through methods like fermentation. The expense of producing the monomers makes this method commercially unviable at this time. But it is a challenge that the PLA manufacturers appear to have successfully solved.

1.3.2.1 Contribution of Polylactic Acid (PLA) The process of fermentation of carbohydrate feedstock can readily produce lactic acid, the polylactic acid (PLA) component. Farming items like maize, for example, could serve as the carbohydrate feedstock. Wheat may also be used, or instead, waste materials from the food or agricultural industries, such as whey, green juice, molasses, etc. The polylactic acid production can be done at low or high level by using many sources. The green juice which is the animal feed by-product is used for the production of PLA at low cost. PLA is one of polyesters which has great scope in the packaging industry. The two isoforms of PLA will decide the characteristics of the same as a packaging material (Garde et al. 2000; Södergård 2000). Polymer having high melting point in crystalline nature can be produced through use of PLA (Sinclair 1996). A material that can be polymerised in the melt, is inclined beyond its Tg, is easily producible, and has a significant possibility for complying with the specifications of a food package is produced by a 90/10% DL homopolymer. Manufacturing temperatures range from 60 to 125 °C, based on the amount of D-to-L-lactic acid present in the polymer. Furthermore, the Tg is reduced by the inclusion of plasticisers when PLA is plasticised with either its copolymer or, optionally, oligomeric lactic acid. As previously mentioned, PLA provides several chances to customise the characteristics of the end product or container. 1.3.2.2 Biobased Monomers From biobased fuel sources, a large range of chemical building or monomers, blocks, can be generated. They can be produced chemically, biologically, or by a mixture of the two. Castor oil has long been acknowledged as a fascinating raw ingredient for the production of polyurethanes. Certain castor oil-based polyurethane compounds had gained use in the coating business and technology sector because of their moisture tolerance (Oertel 1985; Buisman 1999). The major source of fatty acids includes in the specific crops like flax. There are many major oils utilised in the same like oleic acid along with linoleic acid. The substantially unsaturated substance has been significant for use in coats, paints, and perhaps other possible uses involving a dry airflow process. Coatings and other hydrophobic coatings have been manufactured using various oils of agricultural and aquatic origin (Buisman 1999; Carraher and Sperling 2013). Oleochemicals, such as the unsaturated fats like

1

Food Biopackaging for Human Benefits: Status and Perspectives

19

oleic acid and ricinolein, generated from fuel sources like castor beans and coconut have generally been known as helpful progenitor chemicals in creating polymeric structures. For instance, azelaic (di)acid, employed in manufacturing polyamides, can be created biologically from oleic acid. The creation of multipurpose amines, alcohols, and esters results from additional chemical changes of oleochemicals. Many different uses, including polycondensed, surfactants, and lubricant monomers, utilise a few of such materials, some of which are produced economically by Cognis and Akzo Nobel among others. A variety of biochemical as well as biotechnology conversions from carbohydrate resources such as woody debris, maize, and molasses produce a wide range of highly unsafe compounds. The creation of furfural is a proven method for transforming woody biomass into pharmaceuticals. A reaction between furfural and furfuryl alcohol can result in the formation of a furan polymer. The production of levulinic acid out of used paper is another example of using woody materials. It is also required for the production of lactones, furans along with levulinic acid. Proposals to construct an industrial plant for the manufacturing of levulinic acid are indeed being explored. Certain microorganisms that ferment carbohydrates have created viable routes for the synthesis of multipurpose acids like succinic acid. Furthermore, diols have been made immediately by fermentation, including 1,3-propanediol. The extremely intriguing monomers adipic acid and 1,4-butanediol can be reached through pathways that mix biological and chemical conversion. Adipic acid is an example of this (Haugaard et al. 2001).

1.4

Manufacturing of Biobased Food Packaging

Understanding the manufacturing and physical features of polymers is necessary for the design of a biobased packaging or packing materials. If the native biopolymer’s characteristics need not match those needed, or if the polymer isn’t really naturally thermoplastic, the polymer should undergo a specific modification. It is doubtful that such polymer could offer all necessary qualities for highly particular needs (very reduced fuel penetration or high resistance to water), also after changes. As a result, different elements must be used to create a hybrid, laminate, or co-extruded composite. The primary types of packaged foods will indeed be addressed in this part. The core material needs for such groups would be explored and linked with the substance’s growth.

1.4.1

Utilisation of Biobased Materials

Some of the basic repetitive molecular subunits of the biobased polymers that have been discussed up to this point are comparable to those found in a sizable portion of traditional plastics. The repetition of the peptide functionality is present in the protein which can be further compared to the artificial type of the polyamides. This difference is due to the added molecular function that is intrinsic in biobased

20

A. D. Gholap et al.

substances. After the necessary treatment and development process, it ought to be assumed that now the final qualities will be on a level with or better than those of the traditional products. This process and item creation can sometimes be straightforward and are not always likely to be cost-effective. So, it shouldn’t be unexpected that application areas of biobased materials aim to capitalise on their intrinsic degradability and other distinctive traits rather than imitate traditional plastics’ features. Uses for biobased polymers are presently concentrated on biodegradable nonwovens, service ware, coverings for paper and board uses, single-use, biodegradable, short-life plastic packaging, and disposable products. However, the spectrum of potential goods generated using biobased sources is far more significant, and Table 2.1 lists some of the possible goods and uses. Both artificial and biobased materials can create the very same forms and varieties of packaged foods. The issue is whether employing biobased components will produce the same efficiency as using simulation models.

1.4.2

Application of the Barrier Films

Mineral oil yields biodegradable polyesters, which are used for the preparation of blowing films. They are being employed effectively for waste bags as well as other purposes. Based on PLA, renewable sources of polymer grades for film blowing have been created. These biopolyester-based blown films have physical qualities that are similar to cellophane and outstanding clarity. The crystallinity level affects sealability, and excellent printability is also possible. Because of their low melt strength and sluggish crystallisation, PHB/V compounds presently have limited capacity for use in film blowing. A gas barrier and a water vapour layer are necessary in several food packaging applications. No biobased polymer can meet these two criteria. Co-extrusion in this situation may produce laminates that accomplish the intended outcomes. The packaging of cheese can be done with the help of the thermoplastic starch-based material consisting of the extrusion arrangements for the same. The protective coating will be provided by the same for the protection of cheese (van Tuil et al. 2000).

1.5

Advances in Packaging Technology

Active, smart, intelligent, modified, biodegradable, and regulated coatings constitute a few of the packaging systems implemented for the food industries. Modern packaged food technologies, such as smart and active packaging, often include antimicrobial elements (Charles et al. 2003; García-García et al. 2013; Berekaa 2015; Lee et al. 2015; Zhang et al. 2016; Azeredo et al. 2019). Active packaging is made up of materials that can safeguard food products from microbial growth and provide details about its quality while in transit and storing. Active packaging frequently utilises the petroleum containing polymeric materials. However, the development of bioactive materials inside the packaging has been spurred on by

1

Food Biopackaging for Human Benefits: Status and Perspectives

21

worries about the public’s and the environment’s security. Active ingredients are purposefully introduced to packing material or headspace to extend shelf life by slowly releasing antimicrobial compounds (Dobrucka and Cierpiszewski 2014; Kaewklin et al. 2018). To meet the requirement of the food industry for increased fresh produce quality and safety, active food packing was created. The shelf life of tomato fruits kept by active packaging was increased, along with safety and sensory characteristics. In order to create active packaging materials that aid in the preservation of the food, essential oils with antibacterial and antioxidant properties are mixed inside packaged food coverings, thereby inhibiting microbial growth. Furthermore, Azmai et al. observed that encapsulating tomatoes with cinnamic acid and chitosan enhanced quality features like hardness and total solids soluble, decreased physiologic weight loss of tomatoes, and increased life span. The movement of chemicals from packaging materials into food on a worldwide scale, however, raises questions about food safety and may result in contaminants (Scarfato et al. 2015; Ribeiro-Santos et al. 2017; Mior Azmai et al. 2019). According to Bradley et al., intelligent food packaging may result in toxicity concerns, environmental harm, and issues with the reuse and recycling of product packaging. It was claimed that the functional biodegradable corrugated cardboard tray container extended the life span of cherry tomatoes with 1 month. Fresh tomato liquid secretion affects microbiological and sensory quality. To provide purity along with the integrity of packed goods, the absorbent pads are made to absorb exudate (Leonard Pearlstein 1996; Bradley et al. 2011; Otoni et al. 2016). The active scavenging mechanisms take gases like CO2, O2, and ethylene out of the container or packaging. According to reports, the KMnO4-based technology has restricted economic applicability due to questions about its efficacy as a tool for postharvest processing and issues with safety, health, and the ecosystem. They have powered reactive oxygen species. Flavonoids made from several tomato cultivars were used to perform scavenging tasks. Ethylene scavengers have been applied to fruits and vegetables. The KMnO4 converts ethylene into ethanol and acetate. A high ethylene removal rate was noted in KMnO4-promoted nano zeolite, albeit (Zhang et al. 2015; Mansourbahmani et al. 2018; Álvarez-Hernández et al. 2019; Liu et al. 2019). Tomatoes’ transpiration causes condensation, which can result in moisture buildup. Active elements such as silica gel, polyacrylate salts, zeolites, and microporous clays in the packaging system can be used to reduce the moisture content. Water did not condense in the active packaging system of fruits as a result of sodium polyacrylate involving cotton blend used as moisture absorbent, mostly in sachets. The itaconic acid and chitosan-based preservative releasers that were enhanced by bioactive tomato isolate had notable antimicrobial action on packaging materials. The smart packaging is a type of packaging that includes exterior or the interior markers that provide details regarding the background of the product’s quality along with safety. According to Vanderroost et al., intelligent or innovative packaging software allows for recording and detecting changes in the packed material and its surroundings. Food origin is tracked through innovative packaging throughout the distribution chain. For example, according to Bartkowiak et al., lactic acid-based time-temperature markers gave historical information on the quality along with the

22

A. D. Gholap et al.

elevated temperature of lactic acid involved food. Hence, such type of application can be used with acidic tomatoes and items made from tomatoes. A handful of these inventions were industrialised, partially due to more significant investment costs (Vanderroost et al. 2014; Kuswandi and Jumina 2020; Szabo et al. 2020; AgudeloRodríguez et al. 2020).

1.6

Safety and Food Contact Legislation

However, for biobased food packaging to be successful, it must adhere to the product’s quality and safety requirements as well as MCT legal standards, and it should ideally increase the product’s value to make up for any additional material costs. Testing for durability, shelf-life, and migration in this environment as well as for customer approval of the packages are essential. The adoption and full-fledged implementation of biobased packaging materials in the food industry depend on the biobased packaging materials manufacturer and food scientists involved into it. Transferring packaging components to the food is the most unpleasant and well-known interaction, and legislation has been devised to address this issue. Such undesirable encounters tend to occur less frequently. They include the entry of rodents, insects, and bacteria, bacterial contamination of packages, and the collapse of packages in humid environments. Using current good manufacturing guidelines, bacteriologic contamination is addressed. The guidelines for the traditional along with biobased products are given precisely by the European Food Contact Substance Regulation Act especially covering good manufacturing guidelines for the same. Yet, some unwanted interactions are more important for conventional than for biobased materials due to differences in characteristics and origin.

1.6.1

Biobased Materials and Legislation on Food Contact Materials

In industrialised nations, food regulation is being prepared as a result of chemical poisoning of food. Several biobased compounds are “old.” There is well-defined legislation at the national or EU levels, such as that governing paper as well as regenerated cellulose. But “new materials” have also been produced, and it is up to the producer to guarantee their compatibility and safety for food contact. The safety analysis of food materials is based on the identification along with toxicological characteristics. The total amount of chemicals migrated is also involved into the same and these are vital for the assessment of toxicity profile of the foods. In this regard, biocomposite materials are treated the same as traditional materials. Since “edible films” are about definition meant for consumption, they are a component of food production and should adhere to the laws governing foods. One of the practices is the addition of particular forms of ingredients into the food of the packaged food

1

Food Biopackaging for Human Benefits: Status and Perspectives

23

for acceptance and clearance of the same through stringent guidelines given by concerned authorities.

1.6.2

Common Legislation Requirements

The German and Italian authorities implemented the first immigration rules towards the end of the 1950s, and then others. The discrepancies in regulations throughout the European Community soon started to cause issues regarding the packaging companies along with technology. Due to this modification, laws needed to be harmonised in order to eliminate trade restrictions. Directives, Regulations, Decisions, Opinions, and Recommendations are the five basic legislative instruments the European Union uses. Nearly all uncontrolled migration legislation to date has taken the form of directives. Some of the authorities have created structural shift involving a list of the materials and processes dealing with new materials. One of the major roles of community regulations is preventing harmful component migration beyond acceptable limits. Preserving the food’s integrity prevents contamination that could alter the food’s content and sensory qualities. The following materials are on the list of ones that the EC will regulate: • • • • • • • • • •

Ceramics Glass Elastomers and rubber Wood, including cork Coatings, plastics, varnishes Regenerated cellulose Metals along with alloys Paper as well as board Microcrystalline waxes along with paraffin Textile products

Priority was given to ceramics, and regenerated cellulose and development on plastics is not fully explored yet and research on the same is still going on. The regulations about surface coatings and varnishes are still not explored much and thus special attention is required (Rossi 1994; Haugaard et al. 2001). 1. The implementation of good manufacturing practices is required for the production of plastics. 2. Food must not be contaminated by the components of plastics and it must be within the acceptable limit. 3. The components of plastics must not contaminate food in such quantities as to pose a health risk. 4. The plastic directions must be used as a starting point when creating plastics.

24

A. D. Gholap et al.

5. Plastics cannot introduce ingredients into foods in such a way to alter their sensory characteristics. 6. Beginning materials not specified may be utilised if they are oligomers, natural products, or mixes of authorised materials.

1.6.3

Food Biopack Interactions

There are some case studies exploring the potential harmful interactions of food products with that of packaging materials. The role of the compounds migrated from the container into food materials is important for the assessment of customer toxicity and from health perspectives.

1.6.3.1 Role of Migration of Compounds While developing food packaging products, migration is a crucial factor to consider. “The Framework Directive” contains the main legislative provisions. EU Directives and different national laws provide more detailed requirements for paper and board as well as regenerated cellulose materials. Yet, new biobased plastic-like compounds could not be compatible for the existing plastics regulations and recommendations. In contrast to conventional packaging materials, biobased materials may contain additives like antioxidants, cross-linking agents, preservatives, plasticisers, and other natural or synthetic components. As with standard additives for food contact plastics, the migrational activity of these compounds may differ inside the biobased materials when compared to that of the traditional plastics. Plasticisers are required for starch to improve flexibility. Water makes a great plasticiser. Additional examples include amino acids as well as amides. It also contains amino alcohols and quaternary ammonium compounds. Polyhydric alcohols include polyethylene glycols, ethylene glycol, glycerol, sorbitol, propylene glycol, and polyvinyl alcohol. There is no literature on the movement of these chemicals from containers made of starch. A linear dimer of lactic acid known as lactoyl lactic acid, lactic acid, and lactide and other tiny oligomers of polylactic acid (trimer, etc.) are examples of migrants of cyclic dimer of lactic acid known as polylactic acid. Lactic acid is featured in the plastic monomer list in Europe without limits. A 10-day test at 43 ° C using 8% ethanol revealed a migration of 0.85 mg/dm. It was demonstrated that migration into an acidic environment was no different from migration into a neutral one. The migration rate inside the fatty meal containing the simulant was approximately one sixth of proportion into that of the aqueous environment. It has been established that lactic acid, a common food ingredient, is safe at concentrations that are significantly higher than those emitted by polylactic acid (Selin 1997). Plasticisers play a vital role in migration issues, and the selection is based on solubility into fat or water. The intention of the use of film into food biopack is also based on the plasticiser. The mechanism of leaching of materials like chlorinated organic compounds along with florescent whitening agents is vital for the same. The role of harmful metals, volatile oils along with dyes was explored for the possible leaching into food packaging. It is necessary to determine the mechanism of leaching

1

Food Biopackaging for Human Benefits: Status and Perspectives

25

of substances present in paper to the food, but it has not been studied. Large quantities of water-soluble softening agents are present in regenerated cellulose. Hence, compositional constraints for components serve as the foundation for EU regulation for regenerated cellulose. Large quantities of water-soluble softening agents are present in regenerating cellulose. Hence, compositional constraints for components serve as the foundation for EU regulation on regenerated cellulose. However, the migration limit for diethylene glycol and mono is 30 mg/kg of food. However, this migration was significantly decreased when coated films were used (Lancaster and Richards 1996).

1.6.3.2 Microbiological Contamination of Biobased Food Packages In the packaging process utmost care is taken for minimal microbial attack and hence many sterile conditions were used during the same process. Still, the microbial contamination is induced through construction, storage along with consumption of the food materials (Dallyn and Shorten 1988). Thus, efforts are typically made to limit the microbial burden, such as regulated storage and package sterilisation before use, or precautions are taken to prevent contamination during usage and storage. Few studies determine the microbial contamination of packing materials (Kneifel and Kaser 1994). Most studies have concentrated on aseptic containers along with the packages constructed for paper as well as board. Generally, conventional and biobased packaging has negligible microbiological contamination levels and much below the limit of 250 CFU/gram paper or 1 organism/cm and board homogenate as per guidance given by concerned authorities. Only cardboard and corrugated board containers constructed from recycled paper have been noted as an exception (Narciso and Parish 1997). There isn’t a lot of research on the extent of microbial contamination in biologically based materials. A microbiological analysis based on cellulose triacetate-historical composites revealed that the film contained Pseudomonas bacteria primarily after years of preservation at room temperature. This demonstrates that germs can grow in cellulose triacetate, even if it appears to take exceptionally lengthy periods of time (10–100 years) for the levels of microbiological contamination to become intolerable. There is a dearth of research on the rates of microbiological development in and on packaging materials. Methods for testing the synthetic type of the polymeric materials resistance related to that of microbial growth have been published. Agar plates with plastic samples are used in the test cultures process. By determining the proportion of the surface which has been colonised, fungus growth is semiquantitatively measured. A significant variant of ASTM G21-96 has recently been used to analyse both traditional and biodegradable plastic packaging materials. All packaging kinds of cups, trays, films, bottles, etc. can be made from polymers biologically using the same machinery and processes as conventional materials. The implementation of the extremely advanced and sophisticated materials utilised today is based on their high performance. When the qualities of biobased materials containing polymers combinations are contrasted with those of synthetic along with the petroleum-derived polymers, it becomes clear that these polymers have a significant potential for producing effective food packaging. Sensitivity of

26

A. D. Gholap et al.

polysaccharides and proteins to relative humidity should be considered when employing them as building blocks. Biobased substances are likely to be possible by nature, which could aid in their commercialisation. The quality of packaging is based on the variety of polymer composites in multi-layers or composites, similar to how synthetic materials are already used. The resin material can be use in customised food pack to increase variations into the biobased polymer. This is in contrast to conventional plastics made from mineral oil. This benefit should be further utilised to create materials with even greater quantities than those that are already available. Many food ingredients are quite complicated along with exhibiting different characteristics and thus the food packaging process becomes difficult. Since biobased materials have various properties, using them to package food presents extra difficulties. According to the most recent data reported in this study, academics have mostly been focusing on published information regarding the creation of biocomposite packaging products for foods. Food packagers are considering many factors associated with the applications of biobased packaging including material properties, compatibility of selected biobased materials to that of the core food product as well as the total amount of expenses incurred during this big scale process for wide utilisation and application of the same to all their products. However, makers of biocomposite packaging materials are currently researching biobased packaging for a number of products in partnership with food manufacturers. The food biopacked materials used for food packaging will be available at a lesser cost in the market with the help of some polymers based combinations. The products that could use biobased materials include prepared foods, dairy and meat products, beverages, snacks, frozen goods, dry goods, vegetables, and fruits. As biobased materials provide the opportunity of manufacturing films with varied moisture permeabilities and carbon dioxide/oxygen, they will most likely find use in the near future in foods that require short-term cool storage, such as vegetables and fruits. However, for biobased food packaging to be successful, it must adhere to the product’s quality and safety requirements as well as MCT legal standards, and it should ideally increase the product’s value to make up for any additional material costs. Testing for durability, migration, and shelf-life in this environment and for customer approval of the packages is essential (Harthan 1997; Haugaard et al. 2001).

1.7

Patents

The details of the patents related to biopackaging multiple uses are listed in Table 1.1.

1

Food Biopackaging for Human Benefits: Status and Perspectives

1.8

27

Conclusion

The cellulose-containing materials are widely accepted in food biopackaging, and only limited options are available in this sector. Many researchers are working on developing food biopackaging containing other starches obtained from other sources for effective food perseveration. Polylactic acid-based pots are used in some countries for the effective preservation of yoghurt. Renewable resources are likely to be utilised to preserve food products on a global platform. These packaging materials are recyclable, reducing pollution and contributing to environmental well-being. The application of synthetic polymers and digital base packaging are other options. But still, more exploration is required for a better search of biodegradable polymers with minimum manufacturing cost for practical application of food preservation across the globe.

28

A. D. Gholap et al.

Table 1.1 Some of the patents related to biopack utilisation for human benefits Sr. No. 1

Patent ID CN107206763-B

Patent title Wear-resistant film for biopack

Publication date 22-03-2016

2

CN108485915-A

A kind of culture dish biopack

03-05-2018

3

CN106043888-B

Support member for biopack bag

29-02-2016

4

CN206359509-U

Biopack

11-01-2017

5

CN107006434-A

Biopack

19-04-2017

6

CN209002479-U

A kind of biopack for dry land

05-11-2018

7

CN209002652-U

A kind of biopack for paddy field

05-11-2018

8

CN206674840-U

Biopack

19-04-2017

9

CN202708579-U

Liquid nitrogen biopack structure

18-05-2012

10

CN203877190-U

Large-diameter liquid nitrogen biopack

16-05-2014

11

CN208882519-U

A kind of novel liquid nitrogen biopack

21-08-2018

12

CN109777714-A

A kind of preparation method of biopack

11-11-2017

13

CN202635432-U

Biopack

18-05-2012

14

CN202358519-U

Biopack is convenient for transporting earthworms

28-10-2011

15

KR101294633B1 CN109776867-A

Food biopack

07-01-2011

A kind of biopack

11-11-2017

16

Grant date 19112019 04092018 27022018 28072017 04082017 21062019 21062019 28112017 30012013 15102014 21052019 21052019 02012013 01082012 16082013

(continued)

1

Food Biopackaging for Human Benefits: Status and Perspectives

29

Table 1.1 (continued) Sr. No.

Patent ID

Patent title

Publication date

17

CN208610066-U

A kind of biopack

09-04-2018

18

CN208181859-U

A kind of biopack

03-05-2018

19

US-3220382A

Mammalian biopack and method

12-07-1963

20

CN205674195-U

Hanging mobile low temperature stores biopack automatic telescopic handgrip

20-04-2016

21

CN208217337-U

A kind of biopack

20-03-2018

22

KR20040037032A

Biopacking bag for food packing

25-03-2004

Data is compiled from https://patents.google.com/?q=(biopack)&oq=+biopack

Grant date 21052019 19032019 04122018 30111965 09112016 11122018 04052004

30

A. D. Gholap et al.

References Abdul Khalil HPS, Banerjee A, Saurabh CK et al (2018) Biodegradable films for fruits and vegetables packaging application: preparation and properties. Food Eng Rev 10:139–153. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12393-018-9180-3 Affes S, Maalej H, Aranaz I et al (2020) Enzymatic production of low-Mw chitosan-derivatives: characterization and biological activities evaluation. Int J Biol Macromol 144:279–288. https:// doi.org/10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2019.12.062 Agudelo-Rodríguez G, Moncayo-Martínez D, Castellanos DA (2020) Evaluation of a predictive model to configure an active packaging with moisture adsorption for fresh tomato. Food Packag Shelf Life 23:100458. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fpsl.2019.100458 Ali A, Maqbool M, Ramachandran S, Alderson PG (2010) Gum arabic as a novel edible coating for enhancing shelf-life and improving postharvest quality of tomato (Solanum lycopersicum L.) fruit. Postharvest Biol Technol 58:42–47. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.postharvbio.2010.05.005 Álvarez-Hernández MH, Martínez-Hernández GB, Avalos-Belmontes F et al (2019) Potassium permanganate-based ethylene scavengers for fresh horticultural produce as an active packaging. Food Eng Rev 11:159–183. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12393-019-09193-0 Atarés L, Chiralt A (2016) Essential oils as additives in biodegradable films and coatings for active food packaging. Trends Food Sci Technol 48:51–62. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tifs.2015.12.001 Aung SPS, Shein HHH, Aye KN, Nwe N (2018) Environment-friendly biopolymers for food packaging: starch, protein, and poly-lactic acid (PLA). In: Bio-based materials for food packaging. Springer, Singapore, pp 173–195 Azeredo HMC, Otoni CG, Corrêa DS et al (2019) Nanostructured antimicrobials in food packaging—recent advances. Biotechnol J 14:1900068. https://doi.org/10.1002/biot. 201900068 Azevedo VM, Dias MV, Borges SV et al (2017) Optical and structural properties of biodegradable whey protein isolate nanocomposite films for active packaging. Int J Food Prop:1–10. https:// doi.org/10.1080/10942912.2017.1354883 Azmai WNSM, Latif NSA, Zain NM (2019) Efficiency of edible coating chitosan and cinnamic acid to prolong the shelf life of tomatoes. J Trop Resour Sustain Sci 7:47–52. https://doi.org/10. 47253/jtrss.v7i1.509 Berekaa M (2015) Nanotechnology in food industry; advances in food processing, packaging and food safety. Int J Curr Microbiol Appl Sci 4:345–357 Bhatnagar JM, Sabat G, Cullen D (2018) The foliar endophyte Phialocephala scopiformis DAOMC 229536 secretes enzymes supporting growth on wood as sole carbon source. bioRxiv 354365. https://doi.org/10.1101/354365 Bradley EL, Castle L, Chaudhry Q (2011) Applications of nanomaterials in food packaging with a consideration of opportunities for developing countries. Trends Food Sci Technol 22:604–610. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tifs.2011.01.002 Brandelero RPH, Grossmann MVE, Yamashita F (2011) Effect of the method of production of the blends on mechanical and structural properties of biodegradable starch films produced by blown extrusion. Carbohydr Polym 86:1344–1350. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carbpol.2011.06.045 Buisman GJH (1999) Biodegradable binders and cross-linking agents from renewable resources. Surf Coatings Int 82:127–130 Cabedo L, Luis Feijoo J, Pilar Villanueva M et al (2006) Optimization of biodegradable nanocomposites based on aPLA/PCL blends for food packaging applications. Macromol Symp 233:191–197. https://doi.org/10.1002/masy.200690017 Cano AI, Cháfer M, Chiralt A, González-Martínez C (2015) Physical and microstructural properties of biodegradable films based on pea starch and PVA. J Food Eng 167:59–64. https://doi.org/10. 1016/j.jfoodeng.2015.06.003 Carraher CE, Sperling LH (2013) Renewable-resource materials: new polymer sources. Springer, Cham

1

Food Biopackaging for Human Benefits: Status and Perspectives

31

Causse M, Zhao J, Diouf I et al (2020) Genomic designing for climate-smart tomato. In: Genomic designing of climate-smart vegetable crops. Springer, Cham, pp 47–159 Chandra R (1998) Biodegradable polymers. Prog Polym Sci 23:1273–1335. https://doi.org/10. 1016/S0079-6700(97)00039-7 Charles F, Sanchez J, Gontard N (2003) Active modified atmosphere packaging of fresh fruits and vegetables: modeling with tomatoes and oxygen absorber. J Food Sci 68:1736–1742. https://doi. org/10.1111/j.1365-2621.2003.tb12321.x Chisenga SM, Workneh TS, Bultosa G, Alimi BA (2019) Progress in research and applications of cassava flour and starch: a review. J Food Sci Technol 56:2799–2813. https://doi.org/10.1007/ s13197-019-03814-6 Chisenga SM, Tolesa GN, Workneh TS (2020) Biodegradable food packaging materials and prospects of the fourth industrial revolution for tomato fruit and product handling. Int J Food Sci 2020:1–17. https://doi.org/10.1155/2020/8879101 Cukrov D (2018) Progress toward understanding the molecular basis of fruit response to hypoxia. Plan Theory 7:78. https://doi.org/10.3390/plants7040078 Cyras VP, Commisso MS, Mauri AN, Vázquez A (2007) Biodegradable double-layer films based on biological resources: polyhydroxybutyrate and cellulose. J Appl Polym Sci 106:749–756. https://doi.org/10.1002/app.26663 Dallyn H, Shorten D (1988) Hygiene aspects of packaging in the food industry. Int Biodeterior 24: 387–392 Dawson P, Han I, Orr R V, Acton J (1998) Chitosan coatings to inhibit bacterial growth on chicken drumsticks.In: Proc 44th Int Conf Meat Sci Technol, pp 458–462 De Graaf LA, Kolster P (1998) Industrial proteins as a green alternative for ‘petro’ polymers: potentials and limitations. Macromol Symp 127:51–58. https://doi.org/10.1002/masy. 19981270110 de Jesús Salas-Méndez E, Vicente A, Pinheiro AC et al (2019) Application of edible nanolaminate coatings with antimicrobial extract of Flourensia cernua to extend the shelf-life of tomato (Solanum lycopersicum L.) fruit. Postharvest Biol Technol 150:19–27. https://doi.org/10. 1016/j.postharvbio.2018.12.008 Dobrucka R, Cierpiszewski R (2014) Active and intelligent packaging food - research and development – a review. Polish J Food Nutr Sci 64:7–15. https://doi.org/10.2478/v10222012-0091-3 El-Anany AM, Hassan GFA, Rehab Ali FM (2009) Effects of edible coatings on the shelf-life and quality of anna apple (Malus domestica Borkh) during cold storage. J Food Technol 7:5–11 Fahim IS (2019) The future of biodegradable plastics from an environmental and business perspective. Mod Approaches Mater Sci 1. https://doi.org/10.32474/MAMS.2019.01.000109 García-García I, Taboada-Rodríguez A, López-Gomez A, Marín-Iniesta F (2013) Active packaging of cardboard to extend the shelf life of tomatoes. Food Bioprocess Technol 6:754–761. https:// doi.org/10.1007/s11947-011-0759-4 Garde A, Schmidt AS, Jonsson GE, et al (2000) Agricultural crops and residues as a basis for polylactate production in Denmark. In: The Food and Biopack Conference: production and application of biobased packaging materials for the food industry, pp 50–55 Gharezi M, Gharezi M (2012) Effect of post harvest treatment on stored cherry tomatoes. J Nutr Food Sci:02. https://doi.org/10.4172/2155-9600.1000157 Giteru SG, Cridge B, Oey I et al (2020) In-vitro degradation and toxicological assessment of pulsed electric fields crosslinked zein-chitosan-poly(vinyl alcohol) biopolymeric films. Food Chem Toxicol 135:111048. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fct.2019.111048 Gómez-Aldapa CA, Velazquez G, Gutierrez MC et al (2020) Effect of polyvinyl alcohol on the physicochemical properties of biodegradable starch films. Mater Chem Phys 239:122027. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matchemphys.2019.122027 Guerrini S, Borreani G, Voojis H (2017) Biodegradable materials in agriculture: case histories and perspectives, pp 35–65

32

A. D. Gholap et al.

Guilbert S, Gontard N, Gorris LGM (1996) Prolongation of the shelf life of perishable food products using biodegradable films and coatings. Food Sci Technol 29:10–17 Hammami I, Benhamou K, Hammami H et al (2020) Electrical, morphology and structural properties of biodegradable nanocomposite polyvinyl-acetate/ cellulose nanocrystals. Mater Chem Phys 240:122182. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matchemphys.2019.122182 Harthan JC (1997) Investigation of the micro-organisms present on archival cellulose acetate photographic film. Imaging Sci J 45:84–87 Haugaard VK, Udsen AM, Mortensen G, et al (2001) Food biopackaging, in biobased packaging materials for the food industry—status and perspectives. Eur Concert Action, pp 13–14 Hoagland PD, Parris N (1996) Chitosan/pectin laminated films. J Agric Food Chem 44:1915–1919 Hu H, Zhang R, Wang J et al (2018) Fully bio-based poly(propylene succinate-co-propylene furandicarboxylate) copolyesters with proper mechanical, degradation and barrier properties for green packaging applications. Eur Polym J 102:101–110. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. eurpolymj.2018.03.009 Huang X, Mu T, Shen C et al (2016) Effects of bio-surfactants combined with alkaline conditions on volatile fatty acid production and microbial community in the anaerobic fermentation of waste activated sludge. Int Biodeterior Biodegradation 114:24–30. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. ibiod.2016.05.014 Indumathi MP, Saral Sarojini K, Rajarajeswari GR (2019) Antimicrobial and biodegradable chitosan/cellulose acetate phthalate/ZnO nano composite films with optimal oxygen permeability and hydrophobicity for extending the shelf life of black grape fruits. Int J Biol Macromol 132:1112–1120. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2019.03.171 Ivanković A, Zeljko K, Talić S et al (2017) Biodegradable packaging in the food industry. Arch Leb 68:23–52. https://doi.org/10.2376/0003-925X-68-26 Jeya Jeevahan J, Chandrasekaran M, Venkatesan SP et al (2020) Scaling up difficulties and commercial aspects of edible films for food packaging: a review. Trends Food Sci Technol 100:210–222. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tifs.2020.04.014 Jiménez A, Fabra MJ, Talens P, Chiralt A (2010) Effect of lipid self-association on the microstructure and physical properties of hydroxypropyl-methylcellulose edible films containing fatty acids. Carbohydr Polym 82:585–593. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carbpol.2010.05.014 Kaewklin P, Siripatrawan U, Suwanagul A, Lee YS (2018) Active packaging from chitosantitanium dioxide nanocomposite film for prolonging storage life of tomato fruit. Int J Biol Macromol 112:523–529. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2018.01.124 Kantola M, Helén H (2001) Quality changes in organic tomatoes packaged in biodegradable plastic films. J Food Qual 24:167–176. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-4557.2001.tb00599.x Khamhan S, Baimark Y, Chaichanadee S et al (2008) Water vapor permeability and mechanical properties of biodegradable chitosan/methoxy poly(ethylene glycol)-b-poly(ε-caprolactone) nanocomposite films. Int J Polym Anal Charact 13:224–231. https://doi.org/10.1080/ 10236660802070652 Khan B, Bilal Khan Niazi M, Samin G, Jahan Z (2017) Thermoplastic starch: a possible biodegradable food packaging material-a review. J Food Process Eng 40:e12447. https://doi.org/10.1111/ jfpe.12447 Kittur FS, Kumar KR, Tharanathan RN (1998) Functional packaging properties of chitosan films. Z Leb Forsch A 206:44–47. https://doi.org/10.1007/s002170050211 Kneifel W, Kaser A (1994) Microbiological quality parameters of packaging materials used in the dairy industry. Arch Leb 45:38–43 Krochta JM, De Mulder-Johnston C (1997) Edible and biodegradable polymer films: challenges and opportunities. Food Technol 51:61–74 Kuswandi B, Jumina (2020) Active and intelligent packaging, safety, and quality controls Lai H-M, Padua GW (1997) Properties and microstructure of plasticized zein films. Cereal Chem J 74:771–775. https://doi.org/10.1094/CCHEM.1997.74.6.771 Lancaster PJ, Richards DO (1996) Regenerated cellulose film (RCF). In: Migration from food contact materials. Blackie Academic & Professional, London

1

Food Biopackaging for Human Benefits: Status and Perspectives

33

Lee SY, Lee SJ, Choi DS, Hur SJ (2015) Current topics in active and intelligent food packaging for preservation of fresh foods. J Sci Food Agric 95:2799–2810. https://doi.org/10.1002/jsfa.7218 Leonard Pearlstein (1996) Absorbent packaging for food products Liu H, Meng F, Chen S et al (2019) Ethanol treatment improves the sensory quality of cherry tomatoes stored at room temperature. Food Chem 298:125069. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. foodchem.2019.125069 Liu X, Xu Y, Zhan X et al (2020) Development and properties of new kojic acid and chitosan composite biodegradable films for active packaging materials. Int J Biol Macromol 144:483– 490. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2019.12.126 Lombardelli C, Liburdi K, Benucci I, Esti M (2020) Tailored and synergistic enzyme-assisted extraction of carotenoid-containing chromoplasts from tomatoes. Food Bioprod Process 121: 43–53. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fbp.2020.01.014 Mahalik NP, Nambiar AN (2010) Trends in food packaging and manufacturing systems and technology. Trends Food Sci Technol 21:117–128. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tifs.2009.12.006 Makino Y, Hirata T (1997) Modified atmosphere packaging of fresh produce with a biodegradable laminate of chitosan-cellulose and polycaprolactone. Postharvest Biol Technol 10:247–254. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0925-5214(96)01402-0 Mali S, Grossmann MVE, Garcia MA et al (2002) Microstructural characterization of yam starch films. Carbohydr Polym 50:379–386. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0144-8617(02)00058-9 Mansourbahmani S, Ghareyazie B, Zarinnia V et al (2018) Study on the efficiency of ethylene scavengers on the maintenance of postharvest quality of tomato fruit. J Food Meas Charact 12: 691–701. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11694-017-9682-3 Medina-Jaramillo C, Estevez-Areco S, Goyanes S, López-Córdoba A (2019) Characterization of starches isolated from Colombian native potatoes and their application as novel edible coatings for wild Andean blueberries (Vaccinium meridionale swartz). Polymers (Basel) 11:1937. https://doi.org/10.3390/polym11121937 Mnif I, Sahnoun R, Ellouz-Chaabouni S, Ghribi D (2017) Application of bacterial biosurfactants for enhanced removal and biodegradation of diesel oil in soil using a newly isolated consortium. Process Saf Environ Prot 109:72–81. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psep.2017.02.002 Modi SJ (2010) Assessing the feasibility of poly-(3-hydroxybutyrate-co-3-hydroxyvalerate) (PHBV) and poly-(lactic acid) for Potential food packaging applications Müller R-J, Witt U, Rantze E, Deckwer W-D (1998) Architecture of biodegradable copolyesters containing aromatic constituents. Polym Degrad Stab 59:203–208. https://doi.org/10.1016/ S0141-3910(97)00186-9 Muller J, González-Martínez C, Chiralt A (2017) Combination of poly(lactic) acid and starch for biodegradable food packaging. Materials (Basel) 10:952. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma10080952 Narciso JA, Parish ME (1997) Endogenous mycoflora of gable-top carton paperboard used for packaging fruit juice. J Food Sci 62:1223–1239 Nottagh S, Hesari J, Peighambardoust SH et al (2020) Effectiveness of edible coating based on chitosan and Natamycin on biological, physico-chemical and organoleptic attributes of Iranian ultra-filtrated cheese. Biologia (Bratisl) 75:605–611. https://doi.org/10.2478/s11756-01900378-w O’Brine T, Thompson RC (2010) Degradation of plastic carrier bags in the marine environment. Mar Pollut Bull 60:2279–2283. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2010.08.005 Oertel G (1985) Polyurethane handbook. Carl Hanser Verlag, Munich, p 626 Otoni CG, Espitia PJP, Avena-Bustillos RJ, McHugh TH (2016) Trends in antimicrobial food packaging systems: emitting sachets and absorbent pads. Food Res Int 83:60–73. https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.foodres.2016.02.018 Padua GW, Rakoronirainy A, Wang Q (2000) Zein-based biodegradable packaging for frozen foods. In: The food biopack conference proceedings. Copenhagen, Denmark, pp 84–88 Parra DF, Fusaro J, Gaboardi F, Rosa DS (2006) Influence of poly (ethylene glycol) on the thermal, mechanical, morphological, physical–chemical and biodegradation properties of poly

34

A. D. Gholap et al.

(3-hydroxybutyrate). Polym Degrad Stab 91:1954–1959. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. polymdegradstab.2006.02.008 Pellá MCG, Silva OA, Pellá MG et al (2020) Effect of gelatin and casein additions on starch edible biodegradable films for fruit surface coating. Food Chem 309:125764. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. foodchem.2019.125764 Petersen K, Nielsen PV, Bertelsen G et al (1999) Potential of biobased materials for food packaging. Trends Food Sci Technol 10:52–68. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0924-2244(99)00019-9 Prajapat AL, Das P, Gogate PR (2016) A novel approach for intensification of enzymatic depolymerization of carboxymethyl cellulose using ultrasonic and ultraviolet irradiations. Chem Eng J 290:391–399. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cej.2016.01.074 Reiners R, Wall JS, Inglett GE (1973) Corn proteins: potential for their industrial use. Indus Uses Cereal Rhim J-W, Hong S-I, Ha C-S (2009) Tensile, water vapor barrier and antimicrobial properties of PLA/nanoclay composite films. LWT Food Sci Technol 42:612–617. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. lwt.2008.02.015 Ribeiro-Santos R, Andrade M, de Melo NR, Sanches-Silva A (2017) Use of essential oils in active food packaging: recent advances and future trends. Trends Food Sci Technol 61:132–140. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tifs.2016.11.021 Rossi L (1994) Future European Community directives and petition procedures. Food Addit Contam 11:123–129 Sajjan AM, Naik ML, Kulkarni AS et al (2020) Preparation and characterization of PVA-Ge/PEG400 biodegradable plastic blend films for packaging applications. Chem Data Collect 26: 100338. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cdc.2020.100338 Sanaa R, Medimagh R (2019) Applications of modified biomonomers and biomaterials: a prospective from Africa. Curr Opin Green Sustain Chem 18:124–132. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cogsc. 2019.07.006 Sandford PA, Zikakis JP, Brine CJ (1992) Advances in chitin and chitosan. Elsevier, Amsterdam Scarfato P, Di Maio L, Incarnato L (2015) Recent advances and migration issues in biodegradable polymers from renewable sources for food packaging. J Appl Polym Sci 132. https://doi.org/10. 1002/app.42597 Selin JF (1997) Polylactides and their applications, in Biodegradable Polymers Technology Programme -Technology Programme Report Shojaee Kang Sofla M, Mortazavi S, Seyfi J (2020) Preparation and characterization of polyvinyl alcohol/chitosan blends plasticized and compatibilized by glycerol/polyethylene glycol. Carbohydr Polym 232:115784. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carbpol.2019.115784 Shukla TP (1992) Trends in zein research and utilization. Cereal foods world Sibomana MS, Workneh TS, Audain K (2016) A review of postharvest handling and losses in the fresh tomato supply chain: a focus on Sub-Saharan Africa. Food Secur 8:389–404. https://doi. org/10.1007/s12571-016-0562-1 Sinclair RG (1996) The case for polylactic acid as a commodity packaging plastic. J Macromol Sci A Pure Appl Chem 33:585–597 Södergård A (2000) Lactic acid based polymers for packaging materials for the food industry. In: The Food Biopack Conference, Copenhagen (Denmark), 27–29 Aug 2000 Suyatma NE, Copinet A, Tighzert L, Coma V (2004) Mechanical and barrier properties of biodegradable films made from chitosan and poly (lactic acid) blends. J Polym Environ 12:1– 6. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:JOOE.0000003121.12800.4e Szabo K, Teleky B-E, Mitrea L et al (2020) Active packaging—poly(vinyl alcohol) films enriched with tomato by-products extract. Coatings 10:141. https://doi.org/10.3390/coatings10020141 Tai NL, Adhikari R, Shanks R, Adhikari B (2019) Aerobic biodegradation of starch–polyurethane flexible films under soil burial condition: changes in physical structure and chemical composition. Int Biodeterior Biodegradation 145:104793. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ibiod.2019.104793

1

Food Biopackaging for Human Benefits: Status and Perspectives

35

Vaezi K, Asadpour G, Sharifi H (2019) Effect of ZnO nanoparticles on the mechanical, barrier and optical properties of thermoplastic cationic starch/montmorillonite biodegradable films. Int J Biol Macromol 124:519–529. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2018.11.142 Tuil R van, Schennink G, Beukelaer H de, et al (2000) Converting biobased polymers into food packagings. In: The Food Biopack Conference, Copenhagen (Denmark), 27–29 Aug 2000 Vanderroost M, Ragaert P, Devlieghere F, Meulenaer B (2014) Intelligent food packaging: the next generation. Trends Food Sci Technol 39. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tifs.2014.06.009 Webb H, Arnott J, Crawford R, Ivanova E (2012) Plastic degradation and its environmental implications with special reference to poly(ethylene terephthalate). Polymers (Basel) 5:1–18. https://doi.org/10.3390/polym5010001 Won JS, Lee SJ, Park HH et al (2018) Edible coating using a chitosan-based colloid incorporating grapefruit seed extract for cherry tomato safety and preservation. J Food Sci 83:138–146. https:// doi.org/10.1111/1750-3841.14002 Youssef AM, El-Sayed SM (2018) Bionanocomposites materials for food packaging applications: concepts and future outlook. Carbohydr Polym 193:19–27. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carbpol. 2018.03.088 Yu Z, Li B, Chu J, Zhang P (2018) Silica in situ enhanced PVA/chitosan biodegradable films for food packages. Carbohydr Polym 184:214–220. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carbpol.2017.12.043 Zekrehiwot A, Yetenayet BT, Ali M (2017) Effects of edible coating materials and stages of maturity at harvest on storage life and quality of tomato (Lycopersicon Esculentum Mill.) fruits. African J Agric Res 12:550–565. https://doi.org/10.5897/AJAR2016.11648 Zhang Y, de Stefano R, Robine M et al (2015) Different ROS-scavenging properties of flavonoids determine their abilities to extend shelf life of tomato. Plant Physiol 169(3):1568–1583. https:// doi.org/10.1104/pp.15.00346 Zhang M, Meng X, Bhandari B, Fang Z (2016) Recent developments in film and gas research in modified atmosphere packaging of fresh foods. Crit Rev Food Sci Nutr 56:2174–2182. https:// doi.org/10.1080/10408398.2013.819794 Zhou X, Yang R, Wang B, Chen K (2019) Development and characterization of bilayer films based on pea starch/polylactic acid and use in the cherry tomatoes packaging. Carbohydr Polym 222: 114912. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carbpol.2019.05.042

2

Processing of Biobased Packaging Materials J. O. Olusanya, T. P. Mohan, and K. Kanny

Abstract

The processing of biobased materials for packaging is reviewed in this chapter. Information on extractions of biobased products from raw materials, modification, development, and processing into packaging materials was provided. The concerns (biodegradability and mechanical properties) with the use of biobased materials when developing and processing packaging material are the importance of production. The materials are widely influenced by thermal properties considering industrial technology adoption. Using lignocellulosic materials and fillers as main materials comes with difficulties, but it is important that they are compatible with other biobased materials, while considering both materials and their characteristics. Their thermal, mechanical, and barrier properties are not only influenced by materials and characteristics, but the wettability of the coatings, the solubility, and the optical properties are affected. This chapter addresses the method of processing biobased packaging materials. Properties and characterization techniques are presented. The biodegradability of biobased packaging materials was discussed in detail, including their life cycle. Keywords

Biopolymers · Biobased · Film-forming bioplastics · Processing conditions · Packaging materials · Biodegradable

J. O. Olusanya · T. P. Mohan (✉) · K. Kanny Composite Research Group (CRG), Department of Mechanical Engineering, Durban University of Technology, Durban, South Africa e-mail: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected] # The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2023 S. Ahmed (ed.), Biobased Packaging Materials, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-6050-7_2

37

38

2.1

J. O. Olusanya et al.

Introduction

The attempts to develop new eco-friendly materials and products with sustainability principles, which is a concern for the environmental pollution and prevention of nonrenewable and nonbiodegradable resources has attracted many researchers interest (Chemat et al. 2012; Mohanty et al. 2002). In sustainable packaging industries, biobased materials applications with consideration for greener packaging to reduce waste have shown tremendous growth because of the recent usage by consumers (Adeyeye et al. 2019; Johansson et al. 2012a, b; Silva et al. 2020; Taherimehr et al. 2021). Biobased packaging materials are derived from direct or indirect natural origin of renewable raw materials. These biobased materials are derived from several types of biobased plastics, which are polylactic acid (PLA) (Masmoudi et al. 2016), biopolyethylene terephthalate (Bio-PET—up to 30% biobased) (Siracusa and Blanco 2020), bio-polyethylene (Bio-PE) (Robertson and Sand 2018), PBA (based polyurethane prepolymer) (Weng et al. 2019), cellophane (Paunonen 2013), starch blends (Parvin et al. 2010), polyethylene furanoate (PEF—not yet commercially available) (Reichert et al. 2020), and natural rubber (Zhao et al. 2019). Furthermore, there are raw materials in the categories of biobased materials used as packaging materials. These are natural fiber such as paper or cardboard, bamboo, elephant grass, banana fibers, and coconut fibers (Van Huis et al. 2013). The important functionality of packaging is protection of products from damaging, either physically, chemically, or biologically. One of these is food packaging materials, and the safety of the food it contains is the purpose of preserving the quality from the time of manufacturing to the time of consumption. Biobased packaging materials are not only safe but also versatile, flexible, and not expensive (Cutter 2006; NilsenNygaard et al. 2021; Ruban 2009). To improve existing packaging concepts, maintaining mono or multilayers biodegradability novel materials is crucial when promoting the utilization of novel biobased materials for packaging. Packaging concepts require approval for food contacts while promoting biocompatibility and biodegradability (Omerović et al. 2021). Preferably, packaging biobased materials must be processed from agricultural materials, which are derived from renewable resources that have established credibility in the industry and academia without competing with food production. The barrier properties and mechanical properties of biobased and biodegradable materials are relatively poor water vapor, heat stability, and processing of properties when compared to their fossil-based counterparts (Nilsen-Nygaard et al. 2021). However, their suitable barrier, mechanical properties and biodegradability are jusifications for the widespread acceptance (Wu et al. 2021). It is well noted that biobased packaging materials were derived from agricultural and marine sources. This can be classified into three categories: chemically synthesized polymeric materials originated from bioderived monomers; microbial biopolymers; and natural biopolymers directly extracted from raw materials. Considering the polymeric materials mentioned, their biodegradation process is

2

Processing of Biobased Packaging Materials

39

susceptible to the surrounding environmental factors such as humidity, temperature, and the presence of oxygen. The chapter intends to explore biobased materials and explain all necessary modes of processing biobased packaging materials. Although, processing biobased materials for packaging applications, including properties that are comparable and their functionalities relative to significant technological development that are achieved when compared to those of traditional petroleum-based materials used for packaging purposes. Their current production costs are on the higher side and their commercial applications in the packaging field are increasing. The importance of lightweight materials can be attributed to reduction in the cost of material and transportation. Hence, waste and energy consumption can be reduced. Therefore, to achieve the processing of biobased packaging material, use of low-density materials with the opportunity of designing novel thin films or foam structures applications in the packaging field is paramount.

2.2

Overview of Biobased Materials

Biobased materials in general can be classified as products that consist of a substance/s that derived from biomass, which are either synthesized or probably occur naturally, basically referred to products made from biomass (Curran 2000). Biobased products come in different types of materials. Some of these materials include paper and cardboard, which are mostly produced from wood. Plastics materials are also products of biobased raw materials. The plastics are sugar cane or sugar beets, PLA, and bio-PE made from corn. Furthermore, some other raw materials used in the production of packaging materials are plant fibers. The issues with conventional packaging material are different applications related to packaging implemented under effective use; hence, varieties of problems should be overcome. These problems include the use of various types of materials and the interaction of the packaging materials with the content in the package such that the primary package such as plastic is reused on several occasions. Environmental damage and deterioration have become the results of plastic disposal method and the policies behind recycling them. The damages caused by the plastic disposal are rapidly increasing. However, the need to overcome the situation requires a solution. The use of biobased materials has increased over a period of time. Biopolymers are finding applications in many systems, such as drug delivery, scaffolds made of polymeric biomaterials and packaging, surgical implant devices, food packaging containers, disposable bags, and many other packaging material and agriculture biofilms. Among the biopolymers, better properties, both physical and mechanical, are observed in polyethylene furanoate. Good mechanical properties and aqueous stability of the biomaterials are the result of the effect of glutaraldehyde on crosslinking agents (Polycarboxylic acid); however, its modification might not be favorable to the performance of biopolymers, which may eventually cause cytotoxicity (Türe et al. 2012). In most cases, synthetic polymers and other biobased

40

J. O. Olusanya et al.

Fig. 2.1 Categories of biobased materials [Adapted from (Pandit et al. 2018)]

adhesives may be used in binding natural fibers such as flax fibers, natural wool, and bamboo fibers to form fiber-reinforced biocomposite materials (Fig. 2.1). It is well noted that renewable biobased materials are eco-friendly in nature. In the areas of science, these materials are considered as effective substances in terms of different applications. Through enhanced processes, through the body of the host they have received great changes from just an interaction. With regular research studies, their mechanical features are accumulating. Dense and porous types as powders, including coatings, or granules are therefore generated from these materials (Arfin and Fatma 2014). The inherent parts of renewability and degradability of the biobased material are such as starch, gelatin, PLA, cellulose, etc., are recognized as the innovative ones (Athar and Arfin 2017). Nevertheless, there are different types of biobased materials that can be used as raw materials to produce packaging materials.

2.3

Biobased Materials

2.3.1

Biobased Fibers

The extraction of biobased fibers is mainly from natural sources, which include plants, animals, and minerals. These fiber properties are because of the influence of various factors. These factors are the geographical location, origin of the natural resources, extraction mode, and processing methods of fibers. They found usage in polymer matrices reinforcements and several structural applications. However, obtaining biobased fibers from biological origin can therefore be classified as plant

2

Processing of Biobased Packaging Materials

41

fibers and animal fibers (Vinod et al. 2020). In this chapter, the focus is on biobased plant fibers as packaging materials.

2.3.1.1 Plants Biobased Fiber Plant biobased fibers are extracted from plants and trees. The main components of the cell walls of plants are cellulose, hemicellulose, wax, lignin, etc. By considering the geographical part of the plant, the trees from which the fibers are being extracted and their mode of extraction, it is possible to establish the properties of the fibers such as their physical, mechanical, chemical, and morphological properties. Most fibers that are extracted from the plants are known as lignocellulose or lignocellulosic fibers. They are very thin like hair, cotton, etc., and some are thick fibers such as coir. Other fibers are bast fibers, which are obtained from kenaf, jute, linden, kudzu, etc. Figure 2.2 shows various types of biobased biofibers and their sources. Plant fibers can be classified into primary and secondary fibers. This depends on the efficacy of the tree. Primarily, most planted trees are grown to produce fibers and their constituent includes fibers such as cotton, kenaf, sisal, hemp, jute, etc. However the secondary beneficiary of plant fibers belong to the principal product such as banana, coir, oil palm, etc. (Chen et al. 2019; Faruk et al. 2012). The classification of plant fibers is based on their source as well as their biological properties. All the fibers obtained from the plant stem are classified as bast fibers and such types of fibers are flax, hemp, kenaf, jute, etc. Some other types are leaf fibers such as palm, abaca, sisal, etc. Also, there are seed fibers known as cotton, soya, procera, calotropis, kapok etc. Equally, there are fruit fibers such as luffa, coir, etc. There are also grass fibers such as wheat, bamboo, bagasse etc. Lastly, there are wood fibers, either from hardwood or from softwood such as teak wood, rosewood, etc. (Adebayo et al. 2021; Chee et al. 2019; Navaneethakrishnan et al. 2020; Teixeira et al. 2019). 2.3.1.2 Processing Techniques of Biobased Fibers In the extraction of biobased fibers, the type of fiber and its application are the major concern. Different ways of extraction and processing of biobased fibers are the focus of discussion in the following sections. Various strategies and effort have been made in the preparation and extraction of plant fibers. The most common and widely used extraction processes are water retting and dew retting. In such cases of extraction, it normally takes a minimum of 14 days to a maximum of 28 days for the plant to degrade into fibers. However, to intercept over retting, the assessment period requires proper monitoring, without which lower fiber quality and poor fiber strength will be the adverse result (van der Westhuizen 2019). Owing to the processing duration relative to reduction of time, several other methods are being employed and these include mechanical, chemical, microbial as well as enzymatic processes (Brindha et al. 2019; van der Westhuizen 2019). During the water retting process, water penetrates from the outer layer of the plants, which is the central part of the plant fiber stem, directly into the bursts. To enable bacterial degradation, water retting is process that is always done in small

42

J. O. Olusanya et al.

Fig. 2.2 Types of biofibers from plants

streams or lakes. Since plant fiber stems are prone to bacteria, this allows the breakdown of cellular tissue at large and the gummy surrounding the fibers. When processing bast fibers, water retting is always the most adoptable process. However, recommendation of the water retting process is not considered for other fibers to avoid production of low-quality fibers. The water retting process is also timeconsuming, hence causing water contamination; this is the reason why most industries prefer other processes to it (Nagarajan et al. 2019; Rao and Rao 2007). To generate superior fibers within a short timeline of retting, mechanical retting processes are considered. The mechanical extracting machines known as decorticators are used. Decorticators are made up of rollers and beater channels through which the plant stem is fed through. Unwanted parts withing the plant stem are removed during washing of the retted fibers; this includes sun drying of the fibers

2

Processing of Biobased Packaging Materials

43

(Sadrmanesh et al. 2019). When considering reduction of diameter of the fiber, enzyme retting mode is being used (Jung et al. 2019; Sadrmanesh et al. 2019). The fibers are subjected to aqueous solution of 0.85% Triton X-100, and subsequently subjected to aqueous solution for the treatment by using 1% pectinase at 50 °C for 24 h. It is worth noting that natural fibers are associated with a particular problem when considerably used as reinforcements in polymer composites. This problem is the hydrophilic nature of the fibers which is their strong affinity for water in consideration for the hydrophobic nature of the matrix in usage. Through chemical treatment, to enhance surface modification of the natural fibers, the hydrophilicity nature of natural fibers is subjected to reduced. Various chemical treatments involved are (1) acetic acid treatment (Kommula et al. 2016; Mina et al. 2018), (2) benzoyl peroxide treatment (Madhu et al. 2019), (3) bleaching of natural fibers (Basu et al. 2019; de Souza Fonseca et al. 2019), (4) corona treatment (Hassani et al. 2020), (5) graft copolymerization technique (Kakati et al. 2019), (6) isocyanate treatment (Ferreira et al. 2019), (7) laser treatment (Sanjay et al. 2019), (8) NaOH treatment or alkali treatment (Mohan and Kanny 2019b; Sanjay et al. 2019), (9) ozone treatment of natural fibers (Lemeune et al. 2004), (10) plasma treatment (Fazeli et al. 2019), (11) coating over natural fibers with polymers (Masood et al. 2019), (12) treatment of natural fibers with potassium permanganate (Labidi et al. 2019), (13) seawater treatment (Amatosa Jr et al. 2019), (14) silane treatment (Liu et al. 2019), (15) stearic acid treatment (Labidi et al. 2019), (16) vacuum ultraviolet irradiation treatment (Kato et al. 1999), and (17) Y-Ray treatment (Burrola-Núñez et al. 2019). With the chemical treatment process, physical, chemical, thermal, and mechanical properties of natural fibers are meant to change. These properties are governed by certain factors such as temperature, time, technique, and the concentration of the chemical.

2.3.1.3 Properties of Biobased Fibers Biobased fibers, despite their low strength and stiffness, attract better properties than that of synthetic fibers. They have exceptional properties such as low cost, low density, biodegradability, and significant strength. Based on their chemical composition, age of plants, fiber extraction process, and extracted fibers segment, the properties natural fibers may differ (Ganapathy et al. 2019; Sanjay et al. 2019). The properties of biobased fibers including their densities, critical lengths, and strength are shown in Table 2.1. In nature, natural plant fibers are hydrophilic and the mechanical and thermal performance are governed by the potential role of chemical treatments. Regarding animal fibers, such as the hair, feather, and fur, proteins which are keratin and chitosan are the major constituents that govern the strength of biofibers (Gurarslan et al. 2019; Reddy and Yang 2007; Shera et al. 2019). In no circumstances do natural fibers undergo shrinkage, become soft, or get extended through heating and during cooling, they never become brittle. However, bacterial degradation is the end result of natural and animal fibers.

44

J. O. Olusanya et al.

Table 2.1 Properties of biobased fibers Biofibers Ramie Sisal Coir Jute Banana Harakeke Hemp Alfa Cotton Flax Silk Feather wood

2.3.2

Length (mm) 850–1200 900 22–154 1.5–120 3.5–9.0 4–5 5–55 352 10–60 5–920 Continuous 10–30 38–152

Density (g/cm3) 1.5 1.3–1.5 1.3 1.3–1.5 1.28 1.3 1.5 1.4 1.5–1.6 1.6 1.3 1 1.3

Failure strain (%) 2.0 2.0–2.5 15–30 1.5–1.8 1.0–3.0 4.2–5.8 1.6 1.5–2.4 3.0–10 1.2–32 15–60 6.9 13.2–35

Strength (MPa) 400–938 505–855 131–220 393–800 529–918 440–990 550–1110 188–308 287–800 345–1830 105–1500 100–203 50–315

Modulus (GPa) 46–130 9.4–28 4–6 10–55 27–32 14–33 58–70 19–27 5.5–13 27–80 5–25 3–10 2.3–5

Biofilm and Biopolymer Plastic Materials

Various biobased films are derived from categories of biopolymers such as starch, cellulose, PLA, PHA, PEEK, etc. It has been established that biofilm forming from biopolymer is a superior performance in the making of packaging for food industries, drug deliveries, and many other industrial applications (Lavery et al. 2019; Macha et al. 2019; Zhou et al. 2019). Various forms of biofilm processing and improvement are further discussed at length. Polylactic acid (PLA), also known as poly(lactic) acid or polylactide (PLA), is a thermoplastic polyester with backbone formula (C3H4O2)n or [–C(CH3)HC(=O) O–]n, which are formally achieved by condensation of lactic acid C(CH3)(OH)HCOOH with loss of water. The economical production of PLA from renewable resources makes it popular. The use of PLA has been confirmed in year 2021 to have the highest consumption volume when compared to any other bioplastics in the world (Salem et al. 2022), However, PLA is yet to be considered as a commodity polymer. A lot of hindrances through numerous physical and processing shortcomings has occurred to prevent its widespread application (Nagarajan et al. 2016). In 3D printing PLA is extensively used as plastic filament material because PLA melting point is low; likewise thermal expansion is also low, and it has high strength and high heat resistance when toughened by heat treatment. Without the heat treatment process, PLA emits the lowest heat resistance when used as 3D printing plastics. Polylactic acid is the term widely used to denote PLA, but with IUPAC standard nomenclature, it has no compliance, and it is just known as “poly (lactic acid)” (Vert et al. 2020). There is always a confusion when the name “polylactic acid” is mentioned, because PLA in considered as a polyester and not a polyacid (Martin and Avérous 2001).

2

Processing of Biobased Packaging Materials

45

Fig. 2.3 High molecular compounding weight PLA as derived in L- and D-lactic acids. Adapted from Lim et al. (2008) [with permission from Dr. Jean-Francois Lutz]

The molecular weight of PLA is relative to its expansion as shown in Fig. 2.3. These methods are used to produce PLA economically. These methods are direct condensation polymerization, azeotropic dehydrative condensation, polymerization through lactide formation, and ring opening polymerization (Auras et al. 2004; Hartmann 1998; Lim et al. 2008). The polymerization through lactide formation and ring opening polymerization is basically admitted when producing high molecular weight PLA for commercial usage (Auras et al. 2004; Hu 2014). In Fig. 2.4, the classification of biobased polymers derived through renewable resources is categorized into three parts. These are (1) plants and animal sources based polymer extracts such as carbohydrates and protein; (2) biobased monomers as a result of polymer synthetization through fermentation processes and monomers product condensation such as polylactic acid (PLA), polybutylene succinate (PBS), and bio-polyethylene (PE); (3) polymers that are produced from microorganisms, i.e., biochemical synthesis of polymer in the microbial cells [e.g., polyhydroxyalkanoates (PHA)] (Muniyasamy and John 2017). It is worth knowing that plastic is considered as acceptable material for packaging of various consumable products such as food products, cosmeceutical products, and pharmaceutical products (Coltelli et al. 2019). These plastics are low cost, lighter in weight, and possess excellent protection that is made available to the packaged product. It is also worth knowing that excellent functionality is provided by petrochemical plastics for use as packaging materials, which includes mechanical and

46

J. O. Olusanya et al.

Fig. 2.4 Categories of biobased polymers from renewable resources [with permission from Babu et al. (2013)]

barrier properties and also production costs (Álvarez-Chávez et al. 2012). However, in sustainable packaging industries, the extensive uses of biobased materials have been established due to its current growth as packaging materials and waste reduction. Therefore, biobased packaging materials are considered as human-fabricated materials or as biological resources for organically processed macro-molecular materials (Prashanth and Tharanathan 2007). A shift towards usage of biodegradable materials is of great consideration because of the current environmental damage, fluctuations in consumable prices, limitation to resources, petroleum products, etc. Many petrochemical feedstocks such as plastics and synthetic rubber are resistant to degradation. Their mode of disposal is encouraging the move for international expansion of biodegradable polymers (Karan et al. 2019). There is a big discrepancy between biodegradable polymer source and synthetic polymer source. Biodegradable polymers are available in various quantities from renewable sources while synthetic polymer sources are mainly from nonrenewable petroleum resources. These renewable biodegradable polymer resources are polymers grown microbially and starch-based polymer extracted (Kolybaba et al. 2006). Over the years, different types of biopolymers were introduced by many companies. Many manufacturers with different brands and packaging applications have been identified (Babu et al. 2013; Mohanty et al. 2000). According to the materials manufactured by these companies, recent biopolymers they developed are classified as starch polymers (e.g., Mater-bi), cellulosic (e.g., Cellophane), aliphatic polyesters (e.g., PLA), biobased polyethylene (Bio-PE), and microbially synthesized polyhydroxyalkanoates (e.g., poly-3-hydroxybutyrate (PHB)). These biopolymers

2

Processing of Biobased Packaging Materials

47

Table 2.2 Type of biopolymers manufactures [Adapted from (Hu 2014)] Polymers Starch

Cellulosic

PLA

Biobased PET Biobased PE PHA/PHB

Manufacturer Dupont Biotec Novamount Innovia film Eastman Chemical FKuR Sateri BASF NatureWork Cargill Dow Synbra Dupont

Brand Biomax Bioplast Mater-Bi Nature Flex Tenite Biograde Sateri Ecovio Ingeo EcoPLA Biofoam Biomax

Braskem

Bio-PE

Monsano Biomer

Biopol Biomer

Applications Loose fill, bags, films, trays, wrap film

Flexible film

Rigid containers, films, barrier coating

Bottle, trays, films Rigid containers, film wrap, barrier coating Films, barrier coating, trays

are mainly designed for the purpose of packaging applications or they can be considered as potential materials as packaging materials which can be used in future (Babu et al. 2013; Mohanty et al. 2000). The manufactures, brands, and the packaging applications are listed in Table 2.2. Among these biobased biopolymers, PLA has the largest impact on industries as the packaging materials. However, a considerable amount of research has focused on the potential packaging application of starch, cellulosic, and PHA (Johansson et al., Johansson et al. 2012a, b; Siracusa et al. 2008). Biobased plastics have a very low melting temperature, and their value is 60 °C more than the most used polypropylene plastic which has an approximate value of 160 °C. For example, PLA is a suitable material for packaging because of its low oxygen barrier but not suitable for the many warm types of products. Some other biobased plastic materials possess similar functionalities to that of conventional materials. Bio-PE and bio-PET are typical examples; they can serve the same purpose as PE and PET made from oil, since their functionalities and similarities are the same even though they are made from different raw materials.

2.3.2.1 Processing Techniques of Biofilms Biofilms can be produced through different methods; these methods can vary based on polymer types, the particular plasticizers administered, reinforcing material, and mode of applications (Sharif et al. 2019). An example is the development of PLA/ Mg-based biofilm with bioabsorbable tendency; the initial solution is subjected to vigorous mechanical stirring of PLA and Mg particles, while the film was prepared

48

J. O. Olusanya et al.

through tape casting technique in a glass plate (Ferrández-Montero et al. 2019) Also another example is the preparation of melt films using PLA. The process was carried out through extrusion by applying a force of 3000 N at 200 °C to obtain biofilms thickness ranging from 20 m up to 80 m (Fortunati et al. 2012). Equally, lignin chitosan with inclusion of gelatin was used to produce UV-protective sunshield films. The solution was supported with ionic liquid solvents with a melting point