Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Influence of drying method on the crystal structure and thermal property of oil palm frond juice-based bacterial cellulose

  • Polymers & biopolymers
  • Published:
Journal of Materials Science Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Dehydration of wet bacterial cellulose (BC) mainly focuses on the physical characteristic or mechanical strength, but its polymorph crystal structure and thermal properties were rarely discussed. Herein, this study utilizes the drying method of hot-pressed and freeze-dried to the wet BC to elucidate the BC polymorph crystal structure in correlation with the BC crystallinity and thermal properties. The results indicate that dehydration of BC using hot-pressed (BC-HP) method reduced the cellulose Iα allomorph fraction by ± 5.0%, increased the crystallinity by ± 5.0%, but lower in thermal stability compared to freeze-dried (BC-FD) method. Additionally, BC-HP shows an exothermic reaction of melting at lower enthalpy value which is contradict to BC-FD and plant cellulose that presented an endothermic reaction with higher enthalpy values. Thus, investigation on BC polymorph crystal structure and thermal properties may offer an important role to regulate the desired characteristic of the dried BC.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3
Figure 4
Figure 5
Figure 6

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Revin V, Liyaskina E, Nazarkina M et al (2018) Cost-effective production of bacterial cellulose using acidic food industry by-products. Brazilian J Microbiol 49:151–159. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bjm.2017.12.012

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Mohammadkazemi F, Azin M, Ashori A (2015) Production of bacterial cellulose using different carbon sources and culture media. Carbohydr Polym 117:518–523. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carbpol.2014.10.008

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Shezad O, Khan S, Khan T, Park JK (2010) Physicochemical and mechanical characterization of bacterial cellulose produced with an excellent productivity in static conditions using a simple fed-batch cultivation strategy. Carbohydr Polym 82:173–180. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carbpol.2010.04.052

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Klemm D, Heublein B, Fink HP, Bohn A (2005) Cellulose: fascinating biopolymer and sustainable raw material. Angew Chemie Int Ed 44:3358–3393. https://doi.org/10.1002/anie.200460587

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Lin D, Liu Z, Shen R et al (2020) Bacterial cellulose in food industry: current research and future prospects. Int J Biol Macromol 158:1007–1019. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2020.04.230

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. De AI, Fernandes A, Cristina A et al (2020) Bacterial cellulose: from production optimization to new applications. Int J Biol Macromol 164:2598–2611. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2020.07.255

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Kosseva MR, Zhong S, Li M et al (2020) Biopolymers produced from food wastes: a case study on biosynthesis of bacterial cellulose from fruit juices. Food Ind Wastes. https://doi.org/10.1016/b978-0-12-817121-9.00011-5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Illa MP, Sharma CS, Khandelwal M (2019) Tuning the physiochemical properties of bacterial cellulose: effect of drying conditions. J Mater Sci 54:12024–12035. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10853-019-03737-9

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Clasen C, Sultanova B, Wilhelms T et al (2006) Effects of different drying processes on the material properties of bacterial cellulose membranes. Macromol Symp 244:48–58. https://doi.org/10.1002/masy.200651204

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Klemm D, Cranston ED, Fischer D et al (2018) Nanocellulose as a natural source for groundbreaking applications in materials science: today’s state. Mater Today 21:720–748. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mattod.2018.02.001

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Andree V, Niopek D, Müller C et al (2021) Influence of drying methods on the physical properties of bacterial nanocellulose. Mater Res Express. https://doi.org/10.1088/2053-1591/abe016

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Hashim NA, Zakaria J, Mohamad S, Mohamad SF et al (2021) Effect of different treatment methods on the purification of bacterial cellulose produced from OPF juice by Acetobacter Xylinum. IOP Conf Ser Mater Sci Eng 1092:012058. https://doi.org/10.1088/1757-899x/1092/1/012058

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Sharifah Fathiyah SM, Shahril M, Junaidi Z (2021) Oil palm frond juice and coconut water as alternative fermentation substrate for bacterial cellulose production. IOP Conf Ser Mater Sci Eng 1092:012055. https://doi.org/10.1088/1757-899x/1092/1/012055

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Nada AMA, Shabaka AA, Yousef MA, Abd-El-Nour KN (1990) Infrared spectroscopic and dielectric studies of swollen cellulose. J Appl Polym Sci 40:731–739. https://doi.org/10.1002/app.1990.070400510

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Kataoka Y, Kondo T (1999) Quantitative analysis for the cellulose Iα crystalline phase in developing wood cell walls. Int J Biol Macromol 24:37–41. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0141-8130(98)00065-8

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Segal L, Creely JJ, Martin AE, Conrad CM (1959) An Empirical method for estimating the degree of crystallinity of native cellulose using the X-Ray diffractometer. Text Res J 29:786–794. https://doi.org/10.1177/004051755902901003

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Park S, Baker JO, Himmel ME et al (2010) Cellulose crystallinity index: Measurement techniques and their impact on interpreting cellulase performance. Biotechnol Biofuels 3:1–10. https://doi.org/10.1186/1754-6834-3-10

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Bragg WH, Bragg WL (1913) The reflection of X-rays by crystals. Proc R Soc Lond A 88:428–438. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspa.1913.0040

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Patterson AL (1939) The scherrer formula for X-ray particle size determination. Phys Rev 56:978–982. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRev.56.978

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Wada M, Okano T, Sugiyama J (2001) Allomorphs of native crystalline cellulose I evaluated by two equatorial d-spacings. J Wood Sci 47:124–128. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00780560

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Revin VV, Pestov NA, Shchankin MV et al (2019) A study of the physical and mechanical properties of aerogels obtained from bacterial cellulose. Biomacromol 20:1401–1411. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.biomac.8b01816

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. O’connor RT, Dupré EF, Mitcham D (1958) Applications of infrared absorption spectroscopy to investigations of cotton and modified cottons: part I—physical and crystalline modifications and oxidation. Text Res J 28:382–392. https://doi.org/10.1177/004051755802800503

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Andritsou V, De Melo EM, Tsouko E et al (2018) Synthesis and characterization of bacterial cellulose from citrus-based sustainable resources. ACS Omega 3:10365–10373. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsomega.8b01315

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Sugiyama J, Vuong R, Chanzy H (1991) Electron diffraction study on the two crystalline phases occurring in native cellulose from an algal cell wall. Macromolecules 24:4168–4175. https://doi.org/10.1021/ma00014a033

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Heiner AP, Sugiyama J, Teleman O (1995) Crystalline cellulose Iα and Iβ studied by molecular dynamics simulation. Carbohydr Res 273:207–223. https://doi.org/10.1016/0008-6215(95)00103-Z

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Vazquez A, Foresti ML, Cerrutti P, Galvagno M (2013) Bacterial cellulose from simple and low cost production media by Gluconacetobacter xylinus. J Polym Environ 21:545–554. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10924-012-0541-3

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Qiao N, Fan X, Zhang X et al (2019) Soybean oil refinery effluent treatment and its utilization for bacterial cellulose production by Gluconacetobacter xylinus. Food Hydrocoll. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodhyd.2019.105185

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. French AD (2014) Idealized powder diffraction patterns for cellulose polymorphs. Cellulose 21:885–896. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10570-013-0030-4

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Chen G, Wu G, Chen L et al (2019) Performance of nanocellulose-producing bacterial strains in static and agitated cultures with different starting pH. Carbohydr Polym 215:280–288. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carbpol.2019.03.080

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Agarwal UP, Ralph SA, Baez C et al (2017) Effect of sample moisture content on XRD-estimated cellulose crystallinity index and crystallite size. Cellulose 24:1971–1984. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10570-017-1259-0

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Andersson S, Serimaa R, Paakkari T et al (2003) Crystallinity of wood and the size of cellulose crystallites in Norway spruce (Picea abies). J Wood Sci 49:531–537. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10086-003-0518-x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Tyagi N, Suresh S (2016) Production of cellulose from sugarcane molasses using Gluconacetobacter intermedius SNT-1: optimization & characterization. J Clean Prod 112:71–80. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.07.054

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. Watanabe K, Tabuchi M, Morinaga Y, Yoshinaga F (1998) Structural features and properties of bacterial cellulose produced in agitated culture. Cellulose 5:187–200. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1009272904582

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. Chen QJ, Zhou LL, Zou JQ, Gao X (2019) The preparation and characterization of nanocomposite film reinforced by modified cellulose nanocrystals. Int J Biol Macromol 132:1155–1162. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2019.04.063

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. Castro C, Zuluaga R, Putaux JL et al (2011) Structural characterization of bacterial cellulose produced by Gluconacetobacter swingsii sp. from Colombian agroindustrial wastes. Carbohydr Polym 84:96–102. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carbpol.2010.10.072

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  36. Wada M, Okano T (2001) Localization of Iα and Iβ phases in algal cellulose revealed by acid treatments. Cellulose 8:183–188. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1013196220602

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  37. Wada M, Okano T, Sugiyama J (1997) Synchrotron-radiated X-ray and neutron diffraction study of native cellulose. Cellulose 4:221–232. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1018435806488

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  38. Dai H, Ou S, Huang Y, Huang H (2018) Utilization of pineapple peel for production of nanocellulose and film application. Cellulose 25:1743–1756. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10570-018-1671-0

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  39. Blanco A, Monte MC, Campano C et al (2018) Nanocellulose for industrial use. Elsevier

    Book  Google Scholar 

  40. Shah N, Ul-Islam M, Khattak WA, Park JK (2013) Overview of bacterial cellulose composites: a multipurpose advanced material. Carbohydr Polym 98:1585–1598. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carbpol.2013.08.018

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The research was funded by the Ministry of Higher Education under Fundamental Research Grant Scheme No. FRGS/1/2018/TK05/UMP/03/3 (RDU190154). The authors would like to acknowledge Universiti Putra Malaysia (UPM) and Universiti Malaysia Pahang (UMP) for the technical support during the study period. Finally, our gratitude also goes to UMP and MOHE for the provision of study leave and scholarship for the first author.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Chemical and Environment Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Universiti Putra Malaysia, 43400, Serdang, Selangor, Malaysia

    Shahril Mohamad & Luqman Chuah Abdullah

  2. Faculty of Chemical and Process Engineering Technology, College of Engineering Technology, Universiti Malaysia Pahang, 26300, Gambang, Pahang, Malaysia

    Shahril Mohamad, Saidatul Shima Jamari & Sharifah Fathiyah Sy Mohamad

  3. Institute of Tropical Forestry and Forest Products (INTROP), Universiti Putra Malaysia, 43400, Serdang, Selangor, Malaysia

    Luqman Chuah Abdullah, Syeed Saifulazry Osman Al Edrus & Min Min Aung

Authors
  1. Shahril Mohamad
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Luqman Chuah Abdullah
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Saidatul Shima Jamari
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Syeed Saifulazry Osman Al Edrus
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Min Min Aung
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Sharifah Fathiyah Sy Mohamad
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Luqman Chuah Abdullah.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare that are relevant to the content of this article.

Additional information

Handling Editor: Stephen Eichhorn.

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Mohamad, S., Abdullah, L.C., Jamari, S.S. et al. Influence of drying method on the crystal structure and thermal property of oil palm frond juice-based bacterial cellulose. J Mater Sci 57, 1462–1473 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10853-021-06685-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10853-021-06685-5

Search

Navigation