, Volume 21, Issue 4, pp 2679–2693 | Cite as

Bacterial cellulose/gelatin composites: in situ preparation and glutaraldehyde treatment

  • Yuanxi Chen
  • Xiaodong ZhouEmail author
  • Qunfang Lin
  • Danfeng Jiang
Original Paper


Bacterial cellulose (BC)/GEL composites were prepared in situ by adding gelatin into BC-producing culture medium. The addition of gelatin interfered with the formation of the BC pellicle structure and thus made the BC yield and growth rate quite different from that of pure BC. Scanning electron microscope images showed that the width of cellulose ribbons became narrower than that of pure BC and the gelatin filled in the pores of BC to form a dense structure. The addition level of gelatin significantly influences the yield of BC/GEL composites. An optimum value of 0.5 wt/v% gelatin was attained, with which the highest yield of 0.0541 g/100 mL was achieved. Under this condition, the weight percentage of gelatin in BC/GEL composite was 65 wt%. BC/GEL composites were treated with glutaraldehyde to crosslink BC fibrils and gelatin. The crosslinking degree, determined by the concentration of glutaraldehyde and crosslinking time, could affect the swelling behavior, thermal stability and mechanical properties of composites. With increasing of the crosslinking degree, the crystallinity index and swelling behavior of the composites decreased. The increase in the crosslinking degree also descreased the composite’s strain at break in elongation but increased the compressive and tensile strength. Covalent bonding between BC and gelatin provides good strength retention to the glutaraldehyde-treated composites with a high crosslinking degree. Considering the cytocompatibility and properties of composites, the most appropriate concentration of glutaraldehyde and crosslinking time were 1.0 wt/v% and 24 h, respectively.


Bacterial cellulose Gelatin In situ Glutaraldehyde Physical properties 

Supplementary material

Supplementary material 1 (MP4 29446 kb)


  1. Bäckdahl H, Helenius G, Bodin A, Nannmark U, Johansson BR, Risberg B, Gatenholm P (2006) Mechanical properties of bacterial cellulose and interactions with smooth muscle cells. Biomaterials 27:2141–2149CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bäckdahl H, Esguerra M, Delbro D, Risberg B, Gatenholm P (2008) Engineering microporosity in bacterial cellulose scaffolds. J Tissue Eng Regen Med 2:320–330CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bodin A, Ahrenstedt L, Fink H, Brumer H, Risberg B, Gatenholm P (2007) Modification of nanocellulose with a xyloglucan-RGD conjugate enhances adhesion and proliferation of endothelial cells: implications for tissue engineering. Biomacromolecules 8:3697–3704CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Brown EE, Zhang JW, Laborie MPG (2011) Never-dried bacterial cellulose/fibrin composites: preparation, morphology and mechanical properties. Cellulose 18:631–641CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Brown EE, Laborie MPG, Zhang JW (2012) Glutaraldehyde treatment of bacterial cellulose/fibrin composites: impact on morphology, tensile and viscoelastic properties. Cellulose 19:127–137CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Cai ZJ, Hou CW, Yang G (2011) Preparation and characterization of a bacterial cellulose/chitosan composite for potential biomedical application. J Polym Res 121:1488–1494Google Scholar
  7. Chang ST, Chen LC, Lin SB, Chen HH (2012) Nano-biomaterials application: morphology and physical properties of bacterial cellulose/gelatin composites via crosslinking. Food Hydrocoll 27:137–144CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Chen YX, Zhou XD, Yin XC, Lin QF, Zhu MQ (2014) A novel route to modify the interface of glass fiber-reinforced epoxy resin composite via bacterial cellulose. Int J Polym Mater 63:221–227CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Choi YS, Hong SR, Lee YM et al (1999) Study on gelatin-containing artificial skin: I. Prepatation and characteristics of novel gelatin-alginate sponge. Biomaterials 20:409–417CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Courts A (1954) The N-terminal amino acid residues of gelatin. 2 thermal degradation. Biochem J 58:74–79Google Scholar
  11. Engelhardt J (1995) Sources, industrial derivatives, and commercial applications of cellulose. Carbohydr Eur 12:5–14Google Scholar
  12. Gao C, Yan T, Dai K, Wan Y (2011) Immobilization of gelatin onto natural nanofibers for tissue engineering scaffold applications without utilization of any crosslinking agent. Cellulose 19:761–768CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Gennadios A, Handa A, Froning GW, Weller CL, Hanna MA (1998) Physical properties of egg white dialdehyde starch films. J Agric Food Chem 46:1297–1302CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Goissis G, Junior ME, Marcantônio RAC et al (1999) Biocompatibility studies of anionic collagen membranes with different degree of glutaraldehyde cross-linking. Biomaterials 20:27–34CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Guhados G, Wan W, Hutter JL (2005) Measurement of the elastic modulus of single bacterial cellulose fibers using atomic force microscopy. Langmuir 21:6642–6646CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Hans S (1992) Swelling kinetics of polymers. Macromol Sci Phys Part B 33:1–9Google Scholar
  17. Hennink WE, van Nostrum CF (2002) Novel crosslinking methods to design hydrogels. Adv Drug Deliv Rev 54:13–36CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Hwang JW, Yang YK, Hwang JK, Pyun YR, Kim YS (1999) Effects of pH and dissolved oxygen on cellulose production by Acetobacter Xylinum BRC5 in agitated culture. J Biosci Bioeng 88:183–188CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Imai T, Kimura S, Iijima T et al (1990) Rapidly absorbed solid oral formulations of ibuprofen using water-soluble gelatin. J Pharm Pharmacol 42:615–619CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Jonas R, Farah LH (1998) Production and application of microbial cellulose. Polym Degrad Stab 59:101–106CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Khor E (1997) Methods for the treatment of collagenous tissues for bioprostheses. Biomaterials 18:95–105CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Kimura S, Nishiyama T, Imai T, Otagiri M (1990) Improved dissolution and absorption of drugs using low molecular gelatin. Acta Pharm Nord 2:65–72Google Scholar
  23. Kramer F, Klemm D, Schumann D et al (2006) Nanocellulose polymer composites as innovative pool for (bio)material development. Macromol Symp 224:136–148CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Lin YK, Chen KH, Ou KL, Liu M (2011) Effects of different extracellular matrices and growth factor immobilization on biodegradability and biocompatibility of macroporous bacterial cellulose. J Bioact Compat Polym 26:508–518CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Mansur HS, Costa ESJ, Mansur AAP, Barbosa-Stancioli EF (2009) Cytocompatibility evaluation in cell-culture systems of chemically crosslinked chitosan/PVA hydrogels. Mater Sci Eng, C 29:1574–1583CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Maréchal Y, Chanzy H (2000) The hydrogen bond network in Iβ cellulose as observed by infrared spectrometry. J Mol Struct 523:183–196CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Marois Y, Chakfé N, Deng X et al (1995) Carbodiimide cross-linked gelatin: a new coating for porous polyester arterial prostheses. Biomaterials 16:1131–1139CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Martucci JF, Ruseckaite RA (2009) Tensile properties, barrier properties, and biodegradation in soil of compression: molded gelatin-dialdehyde starch films. J Appl Polym Sci 112:2166–2178CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Mathew AP, Oksman K, Pierron D, Harmad MF (2012) Crosslinked fibrous composites based on cellulose nanofibers and in situ pH induced collagen fibrillation. Cellulose 19:139–150CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Mu C, Liu F, Cheng Q, Li H, Wu B, Zhang G et al (2010) Collagen cryogel cross-linked by dialdehyde starch. Macromol Mater Eng 295:100–107Google Scholar
  31. Nakayama A, Kakugo A, Gong JP et al (2004) High mechanical strength double-network hydrogel with bacterial cellulose. Adv Funct Mater 14:1124–1128CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Pardo AG (1996) Effect of surfactants on cellulose production by Necteia catalinensis. Curr Microbiol 33:275–278CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Ross P, Mayer R, Benziman M (1991) Cellulose biosynthesis and function in bacteria. Microbiol Rev 55:35–58Google Scholar
  34. Strobin G, Wlochowicz A, Ciechańska D, Boryniec S, Struszczyk H, Sobczak S (2003) Molecular parameters of bacterial cellulose. Effect of temperature and pH biosynthesis medium. Polimery 48:779–783Google Scholar
  35. Tahara N, Yano H, Yoshinaga F (1997) Two types of cellulase activity produced by a cellulose-producing Acetobacter strain. J Ferment Bioeng 83:389–392CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Taokaew S, Seetabhawang S, Siripong P, Phisalaphong M (2013) Biosynthesis and characterization of nanocellulose-gelatin films. Materials 6:782–794CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Ulubayram K, Cakar AN, Korkusuz P et al (2001) EGF containing gelatin-based wound dressings. Biomaterials 22:1345–1356CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Wang J, Wan YZ, Han J et al (2011) Nanocomposite prepared by immobilizing gelatin and hydroxyapatite on bacterial cellulose nanofibres. Micro Nano Lett 6:133–136CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Wine Y, Cohen-Hadar N, Freeman A, Frolow F (2007) Elucidation of the mechanism and end products of glutaraldehyde crosslinking reaction by X-ray structure analysis. Biotechnol Bioeng 9:711–718CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Yao CH, Liu BS, Chang CJ et al (2004) Preparation of networks of gelatin and genipin as degradable biomaterials. Mater Chem Phys 83:204–208CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Zhang YZ, Venugopal J, Huang ZM et al (2006) Crosslinking of the electrospun gelatin nanofibers. Polymer 47:2911–2917CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Yuanxi Chen
    • 1
  • Xiaodong Zhou
    • 1
    Email author
  • Qunfang Lin
    • 2
  • Danfeng Jiang
    • 1
  1. 1.State Key Laboratory of Chemical EngineeringEast China University of Science and TechnologyShanghaiChina
  2. 2.School of Materials Science and EngineeringEast China University of Science and TechnologyShanghaiChina

Personalised recommendations