, Volume 17, Issue 2, pp 349–363 | Cite as

Microstructure and mechanical properties of bacterial cellulose/chitosan porous scaffold

  • Thi Thi NgeEmail author
  • Masaya Nogi
  • Hiroyuki Yano
  • Junji Sugiyama


A family of polysaccharide based scaffold materials, bacterial cellulose/chitosan (BC/CTS) porous scaffolds with various weight ratios (from 20/80 to 60/40 w/w%) were prepared by freezing (−30 and −80 °C) and lyophilization of a mixture of microfibrillated BC suspension and chitosan solution. The microfibrillated BC (MFC) was subjected to 2,2,6,6-tetramethylpyperidine-1-oxyl radical (TEMPO)-mediated oxidation to introduce surface carboxyl groups before mixing. The integration of MFC within chitosan matrix was performed by 1-ethyl-3-(3-dimethylaminopropyl)-carbodiimide hydrochloride (EDC)-mediated cross-linking. The covalent amide bond formation was determined by ATR-FTIR. Because of this covalent coupling, the scaffolds retain their original shapes during autoclave sterilization. The composite scaffolds are three-dimensional open pore microstructure with pore size ranging from 120 to 280 μm. The freezing temperature and mean pore size take less effect on scaffold mechanical properties. The compressive modulus and strength increased with increase in MFC content. The results show that the scaffolds of higher MFC content contribute to overall better mechanical properties.


Bacterial cellulose Chitosan TEMPO EDC Porous scaffolds Compressive mechanical property 



This research was supported by Japan Society for Promotion of Science (JSPS) under the Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research (Grant number16004160) and RISH-Mission project (2007 fiscal year), Center for Exploratory Research on Humanosphere, Research Institute for Sustainable Humanosphere, Kyoto University.

The authors would like to acknowledge Prof. Yamanaka from Shinshu University for a gift of Acetobacter strain used in this study, and Prof. Isogai and Dr. Saito from The University of Tokyo for their guidance to conduct conductimetric titration.


  1. Araki J, Kuga S, Magoshi J (2002) Influence of reagent addition on carbondiimide-mediated amidation for poly(ethylene glycol) grafting. J App Poly Sci 85:1349–1352CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Athanasiou KA, Rosenwasser MP, Buckwalter JA, Malinin TI, Mow VC (1991) Interspecies comparisons of in situ intrinsic mechanical properties of distal femoral cartilage. J Orthop Res 9:330–340CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bhardwaj T, Pilliar RM, Grynpas MD, Kandel RA (2001) Effect of material geometry on cartilaginous tissue formation in vitro. J Biomed Mater Res 57:190–199CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Czaja W, Krystynowicz A, Bielecki S, Brown RM Jr (2006) Microbial cellulose- the natural power to heal wounds. Biomaterials 27:145–151CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Di Martino A, Sittinger M, Risbud MV (2005) Chitosan: a versatile polymer for orthopaedic tissue-engineering (review). Biomaterials 26:5983–5990CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Eisenberg SR, Grodzinsky AJ (1985) Swelling of articular cartilage and other connective tissue: electromechanochemical forces. J Orthop Res 3:148–159CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Freyman TM, Yannas IV, Yokoo R, Gibson LJ (2001) Fibroblast contraction of a collagen-gag matrix. Biomaterials 22:2889–2891CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Gibson LJ, Ashby MF (1997) Cellular solids: structure and properties, 2nd edn. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  9. Harley BA, Leung JH, Silva ECCM, Gibson LJ (2007) Mechanical characterization of collagen-glycosaminoglycan scaffolds. Acta Biomater 3:463–474CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Helenius G, Bäckdahl H, Bodin A, Nannmark U, Gatenholm P, Risberg B (2006) In vivo biocompatibility of bacterial cellulose. J Biomed Mater Res 76A:431–438CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Hestrin S, Schramm M (1954) Synthesis of cellulose by Acetobacter xylinum. 2. Preparation of freeze drized cells capable of polymerizing glucose to cellulose. Biochem J 58:345–352Google Scholar
  12. Hsu YY, Gresser JD, Trantolo DJ, Lyons CM, Gangadharam PRJ, Wise DL (1997) Effect of polymer foam morphology and density on kinetics of in vitro controlled release of isoniazid from compressed foam matrices. J Biomed Mater Res 35:107–116CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Ikada Y (2006) Tissue engineering: fundamental and applications, interface science and technology. In: Hubbard A (ed) vol 8 Academic Press, Elsevier Ltd, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  14. Jennings TA (1999) Lyophilization: introduction and basic principle. CRC, Boca RatonGoogle Scholar
  15. Jonas R, Farah LF (1998) Production and application of microbial cellulose. Polym Degrad Stab 59:101–106CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Jurvelin JS, Buschmann MD, Hunziker EB (2003) Mechanical anisotropy of the human knee articular cartilage in compression. Proc Inst Mech Eng [H] 217:215–219Google Scholar
  17. Katakai D, Imura M, Ando W, Tateishi K, Yoshikawa H, Nakamura N, Fujie H (2009) Compressive properties of cartilage-like tissues repaired in vivo with scaffold-free, tissue engineered constructs. Clinic Biomech 24:110–116CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Klass HJ, Hopkins J, Neale G, Peter TJ (1977) The estimation of serum lysozyme: a comparison of four assay methods. Biochem Med 18:52–57CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Klemm D, Schumann D, Udhardt U, Marsch S (2001) Bacterial synthesized cellulose-artificial blood vessels for microsurgery. Prog Polym Sci 26:1561–1603CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Kosher RA, Lash JW, Minor RR (1973) Environmental enhancement of in vitro chondrogenesis: stimulation of in vitro somite chondrogenesis by exogenous chondromucoprotein. Dev Biol 35:210–220CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Kuettner KE, Sorgente N, Croxen RL, Howell DS, Pita JC (1974) Lysozyme in preosseous cartilage. VII. Evidence for physiological role of lysozyme in normal endochondral calcification. Biochim Biophys Acta 372:335–344Google Scholar
  22. Kurita K, Yoshino H, Nishimura SI, Ishii S (1993) Preparation and biodegradability of chitin derivatives having mercapto groups. Carbohydrate Poly 20:239–245CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Lahiji A, Sohrabi A, Hungerford DS, Frondoza CG (2000) Chitosan supports the expression of extracellular matrix proteins in human osteoblasts and chondrocytes. J Biomed Mater Res 51:586–595CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Li Z, Ramay HR, Hauch KD, Xiao D, Zhang M (2005) Chitosan-alginate hybrid scaffolds for bone tissue engineering. Biomaterials 26:3919–3928CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Li J, Yun H, Gong Y, Zhao N, Zhang X (2006) Investigation of MC3T3–E1 cell behavior on the surface of GRGDS-coupled chitosan. Biomacromolecules 7:1112–1123CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Mackie IA, Seal DV (1976) Quantitative tear lysozyme assay in units of activity per microlitre. Brit J Ophthal 60:70–74CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Madhihally SV, Matthew HWT (1999) Porous chitosan scaffolds for tissue engineering. Biomaterials 20:1133–1142CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Malda J, Woodfield TB, van der Vloodt F, Wilson C, Martens DE, Tramper J, van Blitterswijk CA, Riesle J (2005) The effect of PEGT/PBT scaffold architecture on the composition of tissue engineering cartilage. Biomaterials 26:63–72CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Mao JS, Liu HF, Yin YJ, Yao KD (2003) The properties of chitosan-gelatin membranes and scaffolds modified with hyaluronic acid by different methods. Biomaterials 24:1621–1629CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Mow VC, Kuei SC, Lai WM, Amstrong CG (1980) Biphasic creep and stress relation of articular cartilage in compression: theory and experiments. J Biomech Eng 102:73–84CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Nehrer S, Breinan HA, Ramappa A, Young G, Shortkroff S, Louie LK, Sledge CB, Yannas IV, Spector M (1997) Matrix collagen type and pore size influence behavior of seeded canine chondrocytes. Biomaterials 18:769–776CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Nge TT, Sugiyama J (2007) Surface functional group dependent apatite formation on bacterial cellulose microfibrils network in a simulated body fluid. J Biomed Mater Res 81A:124–134CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. O’Brien FJ, Harley BA, Yannas IV, Gibson LJ (2005) The effect of pore size on cell adhesion in collagen-gag scaffolds. Biomaterials 26:433–441CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Olde Damink LHH, Dijkstra PJ, van Luyn MJA, van Wachem PB, Nieuwenhuis P, Feijen J (1996) Cross-linking of dermal sheep collagen using water-soluble carbodiimide. Biomaterials 17:765–773CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Parikh SJ, Chorover J (2006) ATR-FTIR spectroscopy reveals bond formation during bacterial adhesion to iron oxide. Langmuir 22:8492–8500CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Pfeiffer E, Vickers SM, Frank E, Grodzinsky AJ, Spector M (2008) The effects of glycosaminoglycan content on the compressive modulus of cartilage engineered in type II collagen scaffolds. Osteoarthritis Cartilage 16:1237–1244CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Powning RF, Davidson WJ (1979) Studies on insect bacteriolytic enzymes III. Lytic activities in some plant materials of possible benefit to insects. Comp Biochem Physiol 63B:199–206Google Scholar
  38. Roberts GAF (1992) Chitin chemistry. Macmillan, LondonGoogle Scholar
  39. Saito T, Isogai A (2004) TEMPO-mediated oxidation of native cellulose. The effect of oxidation conditions on chemical and crystal structures of the water-insoluble fractions. Biomacromolecules 5:1983–1989CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Schulz-Torres D, Freyman TM, Yannas IV, Spector M (2000) Tendon cell contraction of collagen-gag matrices in vitro: effect of cross-linking. Biomaterials 21:1607–1619CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Stokke BT, Vårum KM, Holme HK, Hjerde RJN, Smidsrød O (1995) Sequence specificities for lysozyme depolymerization of partially N-acetylated chitosan. Cana J Chem 73:1972CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Suh JKF, Matthew HWT (2000) Application of chitosan-based polysaccharide biomaterials in cartilage tissue engineering (review). Biomaterials 21:2589–2598CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Svagan AJ, Samir MASA, Berglund LA (2008) Biomimetic foams of high mechanical performance based on nanostructured cell walls reinforced by native cellulose nanofibrils. Adv Mater 20:1263–1269CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Svensson A, Nicklasson E, Harrah T, Panilaitis B, Kaplan DL, Brittberg M, Gatenholm P (2005) Bacterial cellulose as a potential scaffold for tissue engineering of cartilage. Biomaterials 26:419–431CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Toffey A, Samaranayake G, Frazier CE, Glasser WG (1996) Chitin derivatives. I. Kinetics of the heat-induced conversion of chitosan to chitin. J Appl Polym Sci 60:75–85CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Vigano C, Manciu L, Buyse F, Goormaghtigh E, Ruysschaert JM (2000) Attenuated total reflection IR spectroscopy as a tool to investigate the structure, orientation and tertiary structure changes in peptides and membrane proteins. Biopolymers (Pept Sci) 55:373–380CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Yamanaka S, Watanabe K, Kitamura N, Iguchi M, Mitsuhashi S, Nishi Y, Uryu M (1989) The structure and mechanical properties of sheet prepared from bacterial cellulose. J Mater Sci 24:3141–3145CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Yamane S, Iwasaki N, Kasahara Y, Harada K, Majima T, Monde K, Nishimura SI, Minami A (2007) Effect of pore size on in vitro cartilage formation using chitosan-based hyaluronic acid hybrid polymer fibers. J Biomed Mater Res 81A:586–593CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Zeltinger J, Sherwood JK, Graham DA, Muller R, Griffith LG (2001) Effect of pore size and void fraction on cellular adhesion, proliferation, and matrix deposition. Tissue Eng 7:557–572CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Thi Thi Nge
    • 1
    • 2
    Email author
  • Masaya Nogi
    • 2
  • Hiroyuki Yano
    • 2
  • Junji Sugiyama
    • 2
  1. 1.Biomass Technology Research CenterNational Institute of Advanced Industrial Science and TechnologyKure, HiroshimaJapan
  2. 2.Research Institute for Sustainable HumanosphereKyoto UniversityGokasho, Uji, KyotoJapan

Personalised recommendations