Next Article in Journal
Bacteriocin-Producing Enterococcus faecium OV3-6 as a Bio-Preservative Agent to Produce Fermented Houttuynia cordata Thunb. Beverages: A Preliminary Study
Next Article in Special Issue
The Development of Highly pH-Sensitive Bacterial Cellulose Nanofibers/Gelatin-Based Intelligent Films Loaded with Anthocyanin/Curcumin for the Fresh-Keeping and Freshness Detection of Fresh Pork
Previous Article in Journal
Application of a Chitosan–Cinnamon Essential Oil Composite Coating in Inhibiting Postharvest Apple Diseases
Previous Article in Special Issue
Functional, Physical, and Volatile Characterization of Chitosan/Starch Food Films Functionalized with Mango Leaf Extract
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Foods
Volume 12
Issue 18
10.3390/foods12183519
foods-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Biodegradable Chitosan-Based Films as an Alternative to Plastic Packaging

by
Natalia Wrońska
1,*,
Nadia Katir
2,
Marta Nowak-Lange
1,
Abdelkrim El Kadib
2 and
Katarzyna Lisowska
1
1
Department of Industrial Microbiology and Biotechnology, Faculty of Biology and Environmental Protection, University of Lodz, 12/16 Banacha Street, 90-236 Lodz, Poland
2
Engineering Division, Euromed Research Center, Euro-Med University of Fes (UEMF), Route de Meknes, Rond-Point de Bensouda, Fes 30070, Morocco
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Foods 2023, 12(18), 3519; https://doi.org/10.3390/foods12183519
Submission received: 24 August 2023 / Revised: 19 September 2023 / Accepted: 20 September 2023 / Published: 21 September 2023
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Biodegradable Materials for Food Preservation and Packaging)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
The impact of synthetic packaging on environmental pollution has been observed for years. One of the recent trends of green technology is the development of biomaterials made from food processing waste as an alternative to plastic packaging. Polymers obtained from some polysaccharides, such as chitosan, could be an excellent solution. This study investigated the biodegradability of chitosan–metal oxide films (ZnO, TiO2, Fe2O3) and chitosan-modified graphene films (CS-GO-Ag) in a soil environment. We have previously demonstrated that these films have excellent mechanical properties and exhibit antibacterial activity. This study aimed to examine these films’ biodegradability and the possibility of their potential use in the packaging industry. The obtained results show that soil microorganisms were able to utilize chitosan films as the source of carbon and nitrogen, thus providing essential evidence about the biodegradability of CS, CS:Zn (20:1; 10:1), and CS:Fe2O3 (20:1) films. After 6 weeks of incubation, the complete degradation of the CS-Fe2O3 20:1 sample was noted, while after 8 weeks, CS-ZnO 20:1 and CS-ZnO 10:1 were degraded. This is a very positive result that points to the practical aspect of the biodegradability of such films in soil, where garbage is casually dumped and buried. Once selected, biodegradable films can be used as an alternative to plastic packaging, which contributes to the reduction in pollution in the environment.

Graphical Abstract

1. Introduction

The impact of synthetic packaging on environmental pollution has been observed for years. Food packaging has undergone an unusual development because most widespread foodstuffs are being sold in plastic packaging. Nowadays, plastic is registered as the second most frequently used food packaging material [1]. This increases plastic pollution, one of the leading causes of marine animal deaths. Moreover, plastic-based packaging is often supplemented with toxic synthetic compounds (e.g., polyethylene, polypropylene, polystyrene, and other petroleum compounds) that have a negative impact on human health [2]. However, it is generally accepted that the use of long-lasting, non-biodegradable materials is inappropriate because this type of waste will remain in the environment for hundreds or even thousands of years. Polymers made from petrochemical products account for a large percentage of environmental production [3]. The WHO (World Health Organization) estimates that polluted water causes approximately 500,000 diarrheal deaths every year. Billions of tons of dumped plastic generates so-called microplastics and nanoplastics which can easily be ingested by animals, leading to a disturbance of ecosystems and causing the death of millions of children and animals every year. Moreover, due to the considerable financial outlay, the disposal of the materials is inadequate. Unfortunately, recycling policy and separate waste collection are still insufficiently implemented worldwide.
Increasing consumer demands for eco-friendly food are mobilizing the food industry to introduce biomaterial-based food packaging. Ideal food packaging material behaves as a chemical and biological barrier to preserve food quality. Its additional advantages are ease of portability and comfort of use. Moreover, it should be cheap and biodegradable, without causing the accumulation of solid waste in soil. Despite the use of bio-based resources, including polysaccharides, lipids, and proteins, as substitutes for conventional petroleum-based plastics, further investigation is needed for the rational design of ideal food packaging materials [4]. Polymers obtained from some polysaccharides, such as chitosan (CS) and cellulose, are edible and biodegradable [5]. Films made from natural polysaccharides are mostly efficient gas barriers and have moderately mechanical properties. Moreover, it has been proved that CS films can be chemically modified, blended, or reinforced with functional compounds to improve their mechanical properties, chemical and thermal stability, and even their biological responses [5,6,7,8]. Chitosan is obtained from chitin, which composes the exoskeleton of crustaceans (e.g., shrimps, crabs). It is the second most abundant polysaccharide on Earth, after cellulose. Chitosan is the deacetylated derivative of chitin and is mostly composed of (1-4)-linked 2-amino-2-deoxy-β-D-glucose monomers. The source of chitin will determine the molecular size, acetylation degree (DA), N/C ratio, and polydispersity. The degrees of acetylation (DA) for chitin and chitosan are above 90% and below 40%, respectively. These two compounds also differ in nitrogen content; for chitin, the nitrogen content is 7%, and for chitosan, it is greater than 7% [9]. The presence of amino groups in the polymer chain provides some important characteristics, e.g., the electronegative amino group takes up protons and develops a positive charge (ammonium derivative), providing chitosan with several chemical and biological properties [10]. Moreover, chitosan as a major waste product of the seafood industry generates a huge amount of crustacean shell waste. Ineffective management of this waste (it is land-filled, burned, drowned in the sea, or left to spoil naturally) leads to serious environmental hazards. These by-products should be used to produce chitin, which can be converted to chitosan using the deacetylation process. All these features make modified chitosan polymers an excellent alternative to traditional packaging. This polysaccharide can be used in the food industry in the form of flexible packaging films or coatings. Moreover, chitosan films could be modified with various compounds in order to improve their physiochemical properties. Some applications of chitosan in this area are presented in Table 1.
The replacement of synthetic polymers that are harmful to the environment with biopolymers is highly desirable and is expected to be at the heart of strategies to eradicate the threats of micro- and nanoplastics. Therefore, it seems reasonable to determine the degree of biodegradability of chitosan-based films. We previously demonstrated that the incorporation of sol–gel in metal oxides (e.g., ZnO, TiO2, Fe2O3, among others), or the exogenous introduction of Ag/GO through the exfoliation of graphene oxide sheets, improved the strength, flexibility, and antimicrobial properties of a set of chitosan–metal oxide films and different chitosan-modified graphene films [21,22,23,26]. This study aimed to verify these films’ biodegradability and applicability in the packaging industry.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Materials

Chitosan with a medium molecular weight and 85% deacetylation degree, titanium diisopropoxide bis(acetylacetanate) (Ti(acac)2OiPr2), iron (III) acetylacetonate (Fe(acac)3), zinc acetate (Zn(OAc)2), and silver nitrate (AgNO3) were purchased from Sigma-Aldrich (Hamburg, Germany). Graphene oxide (GO) was obtained from graphite flakes using a modified Hummers method [27].

2.2. Preparation of Chitosan–Metal Oxide Films

First, 0.05 g of chitosan was dissolved in 4 mL of 1% (v/v) acetic acid solution. A given mass of the metal precursor with a NH2:M molar ratio of (1:1; 2:1; 10:1; 20:1) was added to the abovementioned solution. The mixture was then stirred for 1 h at room temperature to obtain a homogeneous dispersion, and the resulting solution was cast onto a clean Petri dish for 24 h until total evaporation of the solvent. Details and more data, e.g., from SEM, EDX, and FTIR analysis, are available in our previous work [23]. The chemical composition of CS-MOx-f is presented in Table 2. The preparation of metal (oxide)-containing chitosan films are illustrated in Figure 1.

2.3. Preparation of Chitosan–Graphene Film

The procedure used to prepare the CS-GO-Ag film is similar to that in a previous study [21]. Graphene oxide (GO) was obtained from graphite flakes using the modified Hummers method (82 z food spoilage). First, 1.5 mg of GO was dispersed in 2 mL of 1% (v/v) acetic acid solution and submitted to sonication. Then, 1.5 mg of AgNO3 was added to the GO suspension, followed by the addition of 5 mL of 1% (v/v) acetic acid solution. The mixture was stirred for one minute before the addition of 50 mg of CS. The suspension was stirred for 2 h, poured into plastic Petri dishes, and dried at RT to form films. The chemical composition of chitosan–graphene films is presented in Table 3.

2.4. Biodegradability of Chitosan Films

Determination of the Degradability of the CS Film using Soil Microorganisms
The study presents an assessment of the biodegradability of chitosan films via the determination of the degradability of the CS films by soil microorganisms. The test was performed on a laboratory scale following a method described by Seoane et al., (2017), with some modifications [28]. The soil samples were collected in the garden of the Faculty of Biology and Environmental Protection University of Lodz, Poland, and used as an incubation medium. The soil was maintained at room temperature, with 45% moisture, and pH equal to 6. The soil was placed in a special container and sterile samples were buried at a depth of approximately 10 cm (each sample in a separate container) and incubated at room temperature. The buried samples were dug out at different periods of time (4, 6, and 8 weeks of incubation) and rubbed gently with a brush to remove soil residues. Then, the samples were rinsed thoroughly with distilled water, dried at 50 °C for 4 h, desiccated for 24 h at room temperature, weighed, and the percentage of weight loss of the samples was determined. We analyzed 8 films: A—polyethylene foil, B—CS, C—CS-ZnO 2:1, D—CS-ZnO 20:1, E—CS-ZnO 10:1, F—CS-TiO2 1:1, G—CS-Fe2O3 20:1, H—CS-GO-Ag. Polyethylene foil was used as a negative control. The obtained images of CS films were compared with images after 4-, 6-, or 8-week periods of incubation. The results are shown in Figure 2, Figure 3, Figure 4 and Figure 5.

2.5. Solubility in Water

The water solubility of selected films was estimated gravimetrically according to the method described by Kaya et al., (2018) [29]. The film sample was cut into 2 × 3 cm2 pieces. Then, the initial dry weights were estimated for all tested samples. Next, chitosan modified films were incubated for 24 h at 24 °C in Petri dishes containing 30 mL of deionized water. After incubation, each sample was dried at 50 °C for 24 h. The tested samples were weighed and the weight loss % was calculated according to the following equation.
%WL = weight loss/initial weight × 100

3. Results and Discussion

3.1. Preparation of Metal (Oxide)-Containing Chitosan Films

The two approaches used for the preparation of metal (oxide)-containing materials are illustrated in the following figures (Figure 1). For the sol–gel modification, a suitable amount of the metal alkoxide precursor is introduced in a colloidal chitosan solution. The latter behaves as a template for controlling the growth of the metal oxide during the steps of hydrolysis and condensation. The evaporation of the film induces further condensation and results in shaping flexible chitosan films entrapping metal oxide nanoparticles. Notably, the amount of the starting metal alkoxide with respect to chitosan resulted in a well-defined molar ratio of chitosan: metal oxide. Consequently, films with increasing metal loading (e.g., zinc oxide) could be obtained and assessed in terms of biodegradability.
The second approach deals with the incorporation of Ag/GO as a ternary component. Starting from 3 wt% of graphene oxide, we previously demonstrated that such loading could be exfoliated by chitosan, with the simultaneous entrapment of silver nanoparticles. After solvent evaporation, functional chitosan films with flexibility could be obtained. It should be mentioned that the incorporation of silver was dictated by its outstanding antibacterial and antiviral properties, making it the most powerful chemical species against microbes and viruses.
A detailed characterization can be found in our previous reports [21,22,23]. The in situ modification of chitosan in liquid phase synthesis using metal alkoxide was found to be more convenient compared to the mechanical dispersion of a metal oxide already inside the chitosan network.

3.2. Biodegradation of Chitosan Films in Soil

The chitosan films were selected for the biodegradability test due to their good mechanical, thermal, and antibacterial properties [21,22,23].
All tested films were homogeneous and were stored at room temperature. Each film was halved and photographed before being placed in the soil (Figure 2).
The biodegradation of these films in a soil environment was investigated and compared with that of pure chitosan films. The negative control was a commercial, non-biodegradable polyethylene film. The results were documented with photos, which are shown in Figure 3, Figure 4 and Figure 5. In soil placed in separate containers and incubated at room temperature, all pure chitosan films were degraded. Our further experiments showed that the pure chitosan film was biodegradable after just 2 weeks. The other films were wrinkled and pliable. There was a slight loss of chitosan films with the addition of titanium and zinc (Figure 3). Our results clearly show that chitosan modifications can significantly affect the decomposition of tested materials.
When chitosan films are subjected to biodegradation, a complex series of processes unfolds, leading to the breakdown of the polymer chains and the eventual transformation of these films into simpler compounds. At the onset of biodegradation, water permeates the chitosan film, initiating a swelling process. This hydration step promotes the diffusion of enzymes and microorganisms into the film matrix. Enzymatic degradation is one of the primary mechanisms responsible for the breakdown of chitosan films. Several enzymes, including chitosanase, lysozyme, and proteases, act upon the glycosidic bonds present in chitosan, hydrolyzing them into smaller fragments. The initial stage of the proposed chitosan degradation mechanism is depolymerization (random splitting of β-1,4-glycosidic bonds) and subsequent deacetylation (hydrolysis of N-acetyl linkage). As a consequence, an increase in the degree of deacetylation and a decrease in molecular weight are observed [30]. Cleavage of the chitosan functional groups (amino, carbonyl, amide, and hydroxyl) can occur at the same time depending on the chemical and/or enzymatic conditions. Chitosanase, specifically, plays a crucial role in the initial stages of degradation, cleaving the chitosan chains at random points [31]. This enzymatic hydrolysis process gradually breaks down the chitosan film into oligosaccharides and eventually into individual monomers, such as glucosamine (D-glucosamine or N-acetyl-glucosamine), which can be further utilized by microorganisms [30].
As expected, no change was observed in the negative control, polyethylene (PE) film, after 8 weeks of incubation in a soil environment at room temperature (Figure 5).
Macroscopic modifications in the tested chitosan films, such as the roughening of their surface and formation of holes and cracks, are indications that biodegradation is occurring [32]. The obtained results show that soil microorganisms were able to utilize chitosan films as a source of carbon and nitrogen, thus providing significant evidence for the biodegradability of CS, CS:Zn (20:1; 10:1), and CS:Fe2O3 (20:1) films. Pure chitosan films were utilized the fastest. After 6 weeks of incubation, the complete degradation of the CS-Fe2O3 20:1 sample was noted (Figure 4), while after 8 weeks, CS-ZnO 20:1 and CS-ZnO 10:1 (Figure 5) were degraded. This is a very positive result that points to a practical aspect of the biodegradability of such films in soil, where garbage is casually dumped and buried. In the case of the other tested films, the biodegradation process was slower. It was also observed that the film with the addition of graphene and silver was the slowest to degrade in the soil environment. This draws particular attention due to the already high presence of silver in the environment [33]. Some data suggest that graphene can degrade and transform in a water environment via the action of enzymes and the Fenton reaction, resulting in some graphene mineralization (CO2) and the generation of more oxidized graphene species [34]. There are very little data showing the degradation of graphene oxide via soil microorganisms. Navarro et al. (2020) assessed the potential mineralization and release of GO in a soil environment. The results show that the conversion of GO to CO2 was negligible (<2%) in soil. The obtained data suggest the high bio(degradation) stability of GO, which is likely due to its limited availability resulting from its rapid homo/hetero-aggregation with soil colloids [35]. Some mineralization (9%) of graphene accumulated by hydroponically grown rice plants has been observed [36]. In the case of graphene-based chitosan materials, which due to their properties are promising materials for many industries, it should be remembered that the fate of these materials in the environment should be thoroughly investigated.
Moreover, the extent of weight loss of tested materials was studied. The results are presented in Figure 6.
Figure 6 shows the change in the weight ratio of tested samples in 4, 6, and 8 weeks of incubation time. No change was observed in the weight of the PE film after 8 weeks of incubation. In the case of films where zinc was the metal precursor, the weight losses (incubation time—6 weeks) in CS-ZnO 2:1, CS-ZnO 10:1, and CS-ZnO 20:1 were 27,3%, 31.7%, and 71.8% respectively. This may be related to the chitosan content in these samples. In the film with a higher content of CS, the weight loss was faster. Kuo et al. (2006) had similar observations while investigating a chitosan/nylon blending film [37]. After 8 weeks of incubation of CS-ZnO 10:1 and CS-ZnO 20:1, their complete degradation was noted. The complete degradation of these films was possible due to the enzymes of soil microorganisms [38]. It was also indicated that the diffusion of water into the polymer matrix may cause swelling and accelerate the biodegradation process of the films [39]. The weight loss was gradual in the CS-TiO2 1:1 film and amounted to almost 20% at 8 weeks of incubation time. A similar effect was noted in the case of the CS-GO-Ag film, but the weight loss was much slower.
On the one hand, polymer-based films must be easily biodegradable, but on the other hand, they must have a certain stability for packaging food throughout its shelf life. Films with poor water resistance may soften in high humidity conditions, and thus the molecules can pass through the film more easily as a result of changes in the film structure [40]. We observed that pure chitosan film was the most water-soluble (water solubility rate was recorded as 39.5%). Our data (39.5%) were lower than the values reported by Chang et al. (2021) and Akyuz et al. (2018): 45.7% and 58%, respectively. On the other hand, our score was higher than the results (24%) of Kaya et al. (2018) [29]. With the addition of metal oxide or graphene to the chitosan film matrix, the water solubility of the composites decreased (Figure 7). This may be due to intermolecular interactions between chitosan and metal oxides or graphene. Moreover, the addition of these components reduces the hydrophilicity of the tested films.
There are different types of microorganisms in the soil. Depending on the growth temperature, some are thermophilic, while others are psychrophilic or mesophilic. According to the change in temperature, the biological activity in soil shifts from one to another group. The soil and the microorganisms inhabiting it are heterogeneous, and obtaining uniform samples is practically impossible; therefore, describing ecological relationships is difficult [41]. Chitosanases, which catalyze the hydrolytic degradation of chitosan, are widely found in soil microorganisms and some plants. Several species of chitosanases producing microorganisms have been confirmed, e.g., Bacillus, Arthrobacter, Penicillium, Aspergillus, and Streptomyces [42,43].
In our research, we showed that the unmodified chitosan film (CS) was decomposed most quickly in the soil environment (after 2 weeks). Studies have shown that CS can be biodegraded to non-toxic residues [44]. The rate of its degradation may depend largely on the molecular mass and its deacetylation degree [45]. The relationship between chitosan biodegradability and degree of deacetylation is also dependent on crystallinity. The decrease in chitosan crystallinity results in an increase in the degradation rate of this polymer. The crystallinity of chitosan, and thus its degradation, is also influenced by acetyl residues located along its chain. It is known that chitosan with a lower molecular weight is degraded faster [30,46]. Nakashima et al. (2006) also tested the biodegradability of chitosan films via indoor and outdoor tests. The weight loss values of chitosan films were 31.7, 77.6, and 100% after cultivating with Sphingobacterium multivorum for 0.5, 1, and 1.5 months, respectively [47]. They obtained similar results in the outdoor test when the experiment was carried out using chitosan-degrading bacteria from the soil. Other studies showed the biodegradation of a polyethylene–chitosan (PE-chitosan) film in a soil environment. In soil stored in the laboratory conditions, 73.4% of the chitosan was degraded after 6 months of incubation. The same CS film, buried in an open field, was 100% degraded. It was shown that the PE-chitosan film degraded faster than the commercially available starch-based film [48]. Pavoni et al., (2019) observed the beginning of biodegradation of the cornstarch/chitosan-based films after 15 days of analysis [49]. Kuo et al. (2006) showed that the percentage of chitosan addition significantly affects the degree of biodegradability of nylon 11/chitosan blend films. In the blending film made with 50% chitosan and nylon 11, the percentage of weight loss is four times more than that in pure nylon 11. They also observed more cavities in the tested films when chitosan supplementation increased.
Many studies report that chitosan coatings are eco-friendly, easily biodegradable, and in most cases, edible [9,29]. Other researchers report that incorporating chitosan into synthetic polymers can significantly improve the rate of degradation of plastics [50]. The most commonly used synthetic polymer for chitosan is polyvinyl alcohol (PVA), which is water-soluble and non-toxic.

4. Conclusions

Currently, the packaging industry relies heavily on the use of petroleum-based synthetic plastic materials. Unfortunately, the non-degradable nature of these plastics leads to serious difficulties with municipal waste disposal. For this reason, it is necessary to look for alternative, biodegradable packaging that would help solve the problem of environmental pollution. The results show that soil microorganisms were able to utilize chitosan films as a source of carbon and nitrogen, thus providing significant evidence for the biodegradability of CS, CS:Zn (20:1; 10:1), and CS:Fe2O3 (20:1) films. After 6 weeks of incubation, complete degradation of the CS-Fe2O3 20:1 sample was noted, while after 8 weeks, CS-ZnO 20:1 and CS-ZnO 10:1 were degraded. The obtained data suggest the possibility of using composite films as a green and eco-friendly approach for packaging food products, replacing petroleum-based synthetic plastics. We also call for precautions when graphene derivatives are used, as a slow rate of biodegradability was noticed for chitosan films incorporating graphene oxide. In this case, graphene should be combined with chemicals that could trigger its fast decomposition. On the whole, these investigations provide additional guidelines toward the rational design of new environmentally friendly packaging material, since the resulting CS films displayed good biodegradability.

Author Contributions

N.W.: conceptualization: data curation, investigation, methodology, funding acquisition, writing-original draft; N.K.: investigation, methodology; M.N.-L. investigation; A.E.K. conceptualization, data curation, methodology, writing-review, editing; K.L. conceptualization, funding acquisition, project administration, supervision. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was funded by the National Science Centre (NCN) Poland no. 2017/25/B/NZ9/02900.

Data Availability Statement

The data presented in this study are available on request from the corresponding author.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Sadeghizadeh-Yazdi, J.; Habibi, M.; Kamali, A.A.; Banaei, M. Application of Edible and Biodegradable Starch-Based Films in Food Packaging: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Curr. Res. Nutr. Food Sci. 2019, 7, 624–637. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Yao, Z.; Seong, H.J.; Jang, Y.-S. Environmental Toxicity and Decomposition of Polyethylene. Ecotoxicol. Environ. Saf. 2022, 242, 113933. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Singh, N.; Ogunseitan, O.A.; Wong, M.H.; Tang, Y. Sustainable Materials Alternative to Petrochemical Plastics Pollution: A Review Analysis. Sustain. Horiz. 2022, 2, 100016. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Madera-Santana, T.J.; Freile-Pelegrín, Y.; Encinas, J.C.; Ríos-Soberanis, C.R.; Quintana-Owen, P. Biocomposites Based on Poly(Lactic Acid) and Seaweed Wastes from Agar Extraction: Evaluation of Physicochemical Properties. J. Appl. Polym. Sci. 2015, 132, 42320. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Sun, L.; Sun, J.; Chen, L.; Niu, P.; Yang, X.; Guo, Y. Preparation and Characterization of Chitosan Film Incorporated with Thinned Young Apple Polyphenols as an Active Packaging Material. Carbohydr. Polym. 2017, 163, 81–91. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Flórez, M.; Guerra-Rodríguez, E.; Cazón, P.; Vázquez, M. Chitosan for Food Packaging: Recent Advances in Active and Intelligent Films. Food Hydrocoll. 2022, 124, 107328. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Mourak, A.; Hajjaji, M.; Alagui, A.; Martin, P.; Joly, N. Effects of Geomaterial-Originated Fillers on Microstructure and Mechanical/Physical Properties of α- and β-Chitosan-Based Films. Molecules 2021, 26, 7514. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Chabbi, J.; Jennah, O.; Katir, N.; Lahcini, M.; Bousmina, M.; El Kadib, A. Aldehyde-Functionalized Chitosan-Montmorillonite Films as Dynamically-Assembled, Switchable-Chemical Release Bioplastics. Carbohydr. Polym. 2018, 183, 287–293. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  9. Priyadarshi, R.; Rhim, J.-W. Chitosan-Based Biodegradable Functional Films for Food Packaging Applications. Innov. Food Sci. Emerg. Technol. 2020, 62, 102346. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Yilmaz Atay, H. Antibacterial Activity of Chitosan-Based Systems. In Functional Chitosan; Jana, S., Jana, S., Eds.; Springer: Singapore, 2019; pp. 457–489. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Suo, B.; Li, H.; Wang, Y.; Li, Z.; Pan, Z.; Ai, Z. Effects of ZnO Nanoparticle-Coated Packaging Film on Pork Meat Quality during Cold Storage: ZnO Nanoparticles on Chilled Pork. J. Sci. Food Agric. 2017, 97, 2023–2029. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  12. Maruthupandy, M.; Rajivgandhi, G.; Muneeswaran, T.; Anand, M.; Quero, F. Highly Efficient Antibacterial Activity of Graphene/Chitosan/Magnetite Nanocomposites against ESBL-Producing Pseudomonas Aeruginosa and Klebsiella Pneumoniae. Colloids Surf. B Biointerfaces 2021, 202, 111690. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Ediyilyam, S.; George, B.; Shankar, S.S.; Dennis, T.T.; Wacławek, S.; Černík, M.; Padil, V.V.T. Chitosan/Gelatin/Silver Nanoparticles Composites Films for Biodegradable Food Packaging Applications. Polymers 2021, 13, 1680. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Siripatrawan, U.; Kaewklin, P. Fabrication and Characterization of Chitosan-Titanium Dioxide Nanocomposite Film as Ethylene Scavenging and Antimicrobial Active Food Packaging. Food Hydrocoll. 2018, 84, 125–134. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Zhang, X.; Liu, Y.; Yong, H.; Qin, Y.; Liu, J.; Liu, J. Development of Multifunctional Food Packaging Films Based on Chitosan, TiO2 Nanoparticles and Anthocyanin-Rich Black Plum Peel Extract. Food Hydrocoll. 2019, 94, 80–92. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Li, B.; Zhang, Y.; Yang, Y.; Qiu, W.; Wang, X.; Liu, B.; Wang, Y.; Sun, G. Synthesis, Characterization, and Antibacterial Activity of Chitosan/TiO 2 Nanocomposite against Xanthomonas Oryzae Pv. Oryzae. Carbohydr. Polym. 2016, 152, 825–831. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Suriyatem, R.; Auras, R.; Rachtanapun, C.; Rachtanapun, P. Biodegradable Rice Starch/Carboxymethyl Chitosan Films with Added Propolis Extract for Potential Use as Active Food Packaging. Polymers 2018, 10, 954. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Molaee Aghaee, E.; Kamkar, A.; Akhondzadeh Basti, A.; Khanjari, A.; Kontominas, M.G. Effect of Packaging with Chitosan Biodegradable Films Formulated with Garlic Essential Oil (Allium sativum L.) on the Chemical Properties of Chicken Fillet. Int. J. Hydrog. Energy 2015, 8, 379–390. [Google Scholar]
  19. Adiletta, G.; Zampella, L.; Coletta, C.; Petriccione, M. Chitosan Coating to Preserve the Qualitative Traits and Improve Antioxidant System in Fresh Figs (Ficus carica L.). Agriculture 2019, 9, 84. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Martínez-González, M.D.C.; Bautista-Baños, S.; Correa-Pacheco, Z.N.; Corona-Rangel, M.L.; Ventura-Aguilar, R.I.; Del Río-García, J.C.; Ramos-García, M.D.L. Effect of Nanostructured Chitosan/Propolis Coatings on the Quality and Antioxidant Capacity of Strawberries During Storage. Coatings 2020, 10, 90. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Wrońska, N.; Anouar, A.; El Achaby, M.; Zawadzka, K.; Kędzierska, M.; Miłowska, K.; Katir, N.; Draoui, K.; Różalska, S.; Piwoński, I.; et al. Chitosan-Functionalized Graphene Nanocomposite Films: Interfacial Interplay and Biological Activity. Materials 2020, 13, 998. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Hammi, N.; Wrońska, N.; Katir, N.; Lisowska, K.; Marcotte, N.; Cacciaguerra, T.; Bryszewska, M.; El Kadib, A. Supramolecular Chemistry-Driven Preparation of Nanostructured, Transformable, and Biologically Active Chitosan-Clustered Single, Binary, and Ternary Metal Oxide Bioplastics. ACS Appl. Bio Mater. 2019, 2, 61–69. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Wrońska, N.; Katir, N.; Miłowska, K.; Hammi, N.; Nowak, M.; Kędzierska, M.; Anouar, A.; Zawadzka, K.; Bryszewska, M.; El Kadib, A.; et al. Antimicrobial Effect of Chitosan Films on Food Spoilage Bacteria. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2021, 22, 5839. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Hamodin, A.G.; Elgammal, W.E.; Eid, A.M.; Ibrahim, A.G. Synthesis, Characterization, and Biological Evaluation of New Chitosan Derivative Bearing Diphenyl Pyrazole Moiety. Int. J. Biol. Macromol. 2023, 243, 125180. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Mohamed, A.E.; Elgammal, W.E.; Dawaba, A.M.; Ibrahim, A.G.; Fouda, A.; Hassan, S.M. A Novel 1,3,4-Thiadiazole Modified Chitosan: Synthesis, Characterization, Antimicrobial Activity, and Release Study from Film Dressings. Appl. Biol. Chem. 2022, 65, 54. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Chabbi, J.; Aqil, A.; Katir, N.; Vertruyen, B.; Jerôme, C.; Lahcini, M.; El Kadib, A. Aldehyde-Conjugated Chitosan-Graphene Oxide Glucodynamers: Ternary Cooperative Assembly and Controlled Chemical Release. Carbohydr. Polym. 2020, 230, 115634. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Hummers, W.S.; Offeman, R.E. Preparation of Graphitic Oxide. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1958, 80, 1339. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Seoane, I.; Manfredi, L.; Cyras, V.; Torre, L.; Fortunati, E.; Puglia, D. Effect of Cellulose Nanocrystals and Bacterial Cellulose on Disintegrability in Composting Conditions of Plasticized PHB Nanocomposites. Polymers 2017, 9, 561. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Kaya, M.; Khadem, S.; Cakmak, Y.S.; Mujtaba, M.; Ilk, S.; Akyuz, L.; Salaberria, A.M.; Labidi, J.; Abdulqadir, A.H.; Deligöz, E. Antioxidative and Antimicrobial Edible Chitosan Films Blended with Stem, Leaf and Seed Extracts of Pistacia terebinthus for Active Food Packaging. RSC Adv. 2018, 8, 3941–3950. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Elieh-Ali-Komi, D.; Hamblin, M.R. Chitin and Chitosan: Production and Application of Versatile Biomedical Nanomaterials. Int. J. Adv. Res. 2016, 4, 411–427. [Google Scholar]
  31. Thadathil, N.; Velappan, S.P. Recent Developments in Chitosanase Research and Its Biotechnological Applications: A Review. Food Chem. 2014, 150, 392–399. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Lucas, N.; Bienaime, C.; Belloy, C.; Queneudec, M.; Silvestre, F.; Nava-Saucedo, J.-E. Polymer Biodegradation: Mechanisms and Estimation Techniques—A Review. Chemosphere 2008, 73, 429–442. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Ratte, H.T. Bioaccumulation and Toxicity of Silver Compounds: A Review. Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 1999, 18, 89–108. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Feng, Y.; Lu, K.; Mao, L.; Guo, X.; Gao, S.; Petersen, E.J. Degradation of 14C-Labeled Few Layer Graphene via Fenton Reaction: Reaction Rates, Characterization of Reaction Products, and Potential Ecological Effects. Water Res. 2015, 84, 49–57. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Navarro, D.A.; Kah, M.; Losic, D.; Kookana, R.S.; McLaughlin, M.J. Mineralisation and Release of 14C-Graphene Oxide (GO) in Soils. Chemosphere 2020, 238, 124558. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Huang, C.; Xia, T.; Niu, J.; Yang, Y.; Lin, S.; Wang, X.; Yang, G.; Mao, L.; Xing, B. Transformation of 14C-Labeled Graphene to 14CO2 in the Shoots of a Rice Plant. Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 2018, 57, 9759–9763. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Kuo, P.-C.; Sahu, D.; Yu, H.H. Properties and Biodegradability of Chitosan/Nylon 11 Blending Films. Polym. Degrad. Stab. 2006, 91, 3097–3102. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Akyuz, L.; Kaya, M.; Ilk, S.; Cakmak, Y.S.; Salaberria, A.M.; Labidi, J.; Yılmaz, B.A.; Sargin, I. Effect of Different Animal Fat and Plant Oil Additives on Physicochemical, Mechanical, Antimicrobial and Antioxidant Properties of Chitosan Films. Int. J. Biol. Macromol. 2018, 111, 475–484. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. De Carli, C.; Aylanc, V.; Mouffok, K.M.; Santamaria-Echart, A.; Barreiro, F.; Tomás, A.; Pereira, C.; Rodrigues, P.; Vilas-Boas, M.; Falcão, S.I. Production of Chitosan-Based Biodegradable Active Films Using Bio-Waste Enriched with Polyphenol Propolis Extract Envisaging Food Packaging Applications. Int. J. Biol. Macromol. 2022, 213, 486–497. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Chang, X.; Hou, Y.; Liu, Q.; Hu, Z.; Xie, Q.; Shan, Y.; Li, G.; Ding, S. Physicochemical and Antimicrobial Properties of Chitosan Composite Films Incorporated with Glycerol Monolaurate and Nano-TiO2. Food Hydrocoll. 2021, 119, 106846. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Maron, P.-A.; Mougel, C.; Ranjard, L. Soil Microbial Diversity: Methodological Strategy, Spatial Overview and Functional Interest. Comptes Rendus Biol. 2011, 334, 403–411. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Sinha, S.; Tripathi, P.; Chand, S. A New Bifunctional Chitosanase Enzyme from Streptomyces Sp. and Its Application in Production of Antioxidant Chitooligosaccharides. Appl. Biochem. Biotechnol. 2012, 167, 1029–1039. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Swiontek Brzezinska, M.; Jankiewicz, U.; Burkowska, A.; Walczak, M. Chitinolytic Microorganisms and Their Possible Application in Environmental Protection. Curr. Microbiol. 2014, 68, 71–81. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Bagheri-Khoulenjani, S.; Taghizadeh, S.M.; Mirzadeh, H. An Investigation on the Short-Term Biodegradability of Chitosan with Various Molecular Weights and Degrees of Deacetylation. Carbohydr. Polym. 2009, 78, 773–778. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Zhang, H.; Neau, S.H. In Vitro Degradation of Chitosan by a Commercial Enzyme Preparation: Effect of Molecular Weight and Degree of Deacetylation. Biomaterials 2001, 22, 1653–1658. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Croisier, F.; Jérôme, C. Chitosan-Based Biomaterials for Tissue Engineering. Eur. Polym. J. 2013, 49, 780–792. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Nakashima, T.; Matsuo, M.; Bin, Y.; Nakano, Y.; Kobayashi, T.; Komemushi, S.; Sakagami, Y. Mechanical Properties and Antibacterial Efficacy of Chitosan Films. Biocontrol Sci. 2006, 11, 27–36. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Makarios-Laham, I.; Lee, T.-C. Biodegradability of Chitin- and Chitosan-Containing Films in Soil Environment. J. Environ. Polym. Degr. 1995, 3, 31–36. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Pavoni, J.M.F.; Luchese, C.L.; Tessaro, I.C. Impact of Acid Type for Chitosan Dissolution on the Characteristics and Biodegradability of Cornstarch/Chitosan Based Films. Int. J. Biol. Macromol. 2019, 138, 693–703. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Giannakas, A.; Vlacha, M.; Salmas, C.; Leontiou, A.; Katapodis, P.; Stamatis, H.; Barkoula, N.-M.; Ladavos, A. Preparation, Characterization, Mechanical, Barrier and Antimicrobial Properties of Chitosan/PVOH/Clay Nanocomposites. Carbohydr. Polym. 2016, 140, 408–415. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Foods 12 03519 g001
Figure 1. Preparation of modified chitosan films following two strategies. (a) Deacetylation of chitin marine waste affords chitosan. (b) Preparation of metal-oxide-modified chitosan using sol–gel chemistry. (c) Illustration of the exfoliation of graphene oxide sheets and the entrapment of silver nanoparticles inside the network.
Figure 1. Preparation of modified chitosan films following two strategies. (a) Deacetylation of chitin marine waste affords chitosan. (b) Preparation of metal-oxide-modified chitosan using sol–gel chemistry. (c) Illustration of the exfoliation of graphene oxide sheets and the entrapment of silver nanoparticles inside the network.
Foods 12 03519 g001
Foods 12 03519 g002
Figure 2. Images of the visual appearance of the chitosan, chitosan–metal and chitosan–graphene films before incubation in the soil. (A)—polyethylene foil, (B)—CS, (C)—CS-ZnO 2:1, (D)—CS-ZnO 20:1, (E)—CS-ZnO 10:1, (F)—CS-TiO2 1:1, (G)—CS-Fe2O3 20:1, (H)—CS-GO-Ag. Time incubation, t = 0.
Figure 2. Images of the visual appearance of the chitosan, chitosan–metal and chitosan–graphene films before incubation in the soil. (A)—polyethylene foil, (B)—CS, (C)—CS-ZnO 2:1, (D)—CS-ZnO 20:1, (E)—CS-ZnO 10:1, (F)—CS-TiO2 1:1, (G)—CS-Fe2O3 20:1, (H)—CS-GO-Ag. Time incubation, t = 0.
Foods 12 03519 g002
Foods 12 03519 g003
Figure 3. Images of the visual appearance of the chitosan, chitosan–metal and chitosan–graphene films after 4 weeks incubation in the soil. (A)—polyethylene foil, (B)—CS, (C)—CS-ZnO 2:1, (D)—CS-ZnO 20:1, (E)—CS-ZnO 10:1, (F)—CS-TiO2 1:1, (G)—CS-Fe2O3 20:1, (H)—CS-GO-Ag.
Figure 3. Images of the visual appearance of the chitosan, chitosan–metal and chitosan–graphene films after 4 weeks incubation in the soil. (A)—polyethylene foil, (B)—CS, (C)—CS-ZnO 2:1, (D)—CS-ZnO 20:1, (E)—CS-ZnO 10:1, (F)—CS-TiO2 1:1, (G)—CS-Fe2O3 20:1, (H)—CS-GO-Ag.
Foods 12 03519 g003
Foods 12 03519 g004
Figure 4. Images of the visual appearance of the chitosan, chitosan–metal and chitosan–graphene films after 6 weeks incubation in the soil. (A)—polyethylene foil, (B)—CS, (C)—CS-ZnO 2:1, (D)—CS-ZnO 20:1, (E)—CS-ZnO 10:1, (F)—CS-TiO2 1:1, (G)—CS-Fe2O3 20:1, (H)—CS-GO-Ag.
Figure 4. Images of the visual appearance of the chitosan, chitosan–metal and chitosan–graphene films after 6 weeks incubation in the soil. (A)—polyethylene foil, (B)—CS, (C)—CS-ZnO 2:1, (D)—CS-ZnO 20:1, (E)—CS-ZnO 10:1, (F)—CS-TiO2 1:1, (G)—CS-Fe2O3 20:1, (H)—CS-GO-Ag.
Foods 12 03519 g004
Foods 12 03519 g005
Figure 5. Images of the visual appearance of the chitosan, chitosan–metal and chitosan–graphene films after 8 weeks incubation in the soil. (A)—polyethylene foil, (B)—CS, (C)—CS-ZnO 2:1, (D)—CS-ZnO 20:1, (E)—CS-ZnO 10:1, (F)—CS-TiO2 1:1, (G)—CS-Fe2O3 20:1, (H)—CS-GO-Ag.
Figure 5. Images of the visual appearance of the chitosan, chitosan–metal and chitosan–graphene films after 8 weeks incubation in the soil. (A)—polyethylene foil, (B)—CS, (C)—CS-ZnO 2:1, (D)—CS-ZnO 20:1, (E)—CS-ZnO 10:1, (F)—CS-TiO2 1:1, (G)—CS-Fe2O3 20:1, (H)—CS-GO-Ag.
Foods 12 03519 g005
Foods 12 03519 g006
Figure 6. Change in the weight ratio in (PE) polyethylene foil, CS, CS-ZnO 2:1, CS-ZnO 20:1, CS-ZnO 10:1, CS-TiO2 1:1, CS-Fe2O3 20:1, CS-GO-Ag films exposed to soil environment after 4, 6 and 8 weeks of incubation time.
Figure 6. Change in the weight ratio in (PE) polyethylene foil, CS, CS-ZnO 2:1, CS-ZnO 20:1, CS-ZnO 10:1, CS-TiO2 1:1, CS-Fe2O3 20:1, CS-GO-Ag films exposed to soil environment after 4, 6 and 8 weeks of incubation time.
Foods 12 03519 g006
Foods 12 03519 g007
Figure 7. Water solubility of the chitosan, chitosan–metal and chitosan–graphene films after 24 h incubation in the deionized water.
Figure 7. Water solubility of the chitosan, chitosan–metal and chitosan–graphene films after 24 h incubation in the deionized water.
Foods 12 03519 g007
Table 1. Application of CS in food packaging.
Table 1. Application of CS in food packaging.
Type of Chitosan FilmPropertiesReferences
CS/ZnOimprovement of the quality of pork meat during cold storage[11]
(CS)/Fe3O4, (Gr)/CS/Fe3O4antimicrobial activity[12]
CS/GEL/AgNPsantimicrobial activity[13]
CS/TiO2 NPsexposure to UV light, triggered higher antimicrobial activity[14]
CS/TiO2 NPsantimicrobial, antioxidant, and ethylene scavenging properties[15]
CS/TiO2 NPsgood antimicrobial activity under dark and light conditions[16]
RS/CMChenhanced antioxidant and antimicrobial properties[17]
CS/garlic essential oilantioxidant and antimicrobial activity[18]
CSantioxidant system of figs during storage[19]
CS/propolis coatingsantioxidant system of strawberries during storage[20]
CS/GO filmsantimicrobial activity[21]
CS/metal oxide films
CS/GO films		antimicrobial activity[22,23]
DPPS-CH (chitosan bearing pyrazole derivative)antimicrobial activity[24]
Cs-EATT
Cs-BATT (chitosan bearing 1,3,4-thiadiazole derivative)		antimicrobial activity[25]
Table 2. Chemical composition of CS-MOx-f.
Table 2. Chemical composition of CS-MOx-f.
Sample CodeMetal PrecursorsMolar Ratio
NH2: Metal Precursor
PE-
CS-
CS-ZnO 2:1Zinc acetate2:1
CS-ZnO 10:1Zinc acetate10:1
CS-ZnO 20:1Zinc acetate20:1
CS-TiO2 1:1Titanium diisopropoxide bis(acac)1:1
CS-Fe2O3 20:1Iron(III) acetylacetonate20:1
Table 3. Chemical composition of chitosan–graphene films.
Table 3. Chemical composition of chitosan–graphene films.
Sample CodeFunctionalized Graphene FillersMetal Precursors
CS-GO-AgGO (3 wt%)Silver nitrate (3%)
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Wrońska, N.; Katir, N.; Nowak-Lange, M.; El Kadib, A.; Lisowska, K. Biodegradable Chitosan-Based Films as an Alternative to Plastic Packaging. Foods 2023, 12, 3519. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods12183519

AMA Style

Wrońska N, Katir N, Nowak-Lange M, El Kadib A, Lisowska K. Biodegradable Chitosan-Based Films as an Alternative to Plastic Packaging. Foods. 2023; 12(18):3519. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods12183519

Chicago/Turabian Style

Wrońska, Natalia, Nadia Katir, Marta Nowak-Lange, Abdelkrim El Kadib, and Katarzyna Lisowska. 2023. "Biodegradable Chitosan-Based Films as an Alternative to Plastic Packaging" Foods 12, no. 18: 3519. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods12183519

APA Style

Wrońska, N., Katir, N., Nowak-Lange, M., El Kadib, A., & Lisowska, K. (2023). Biodegradable Chitosan-Based Films as an Alternative to Plastic Packaging. Foods, 12(18), 3519. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods12183519

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop