Advertisement

Cellulose

, Volume 26, Issue 6, pp 3643–3654 | Cite as

Surface modification of banana fibers using organosilanes: an IGC insight

  • Emanuel Alonso
  • Laly A. Pothan
  • Artur Ferreira
  • Nereida CordeiroEmail author
Original Research
  • 77 Downloads

Abstract

Banana fibers are an agricultural waste material with a great exploitation potential due to their cellulose-rich content. Raw banana fibers (RBF) were treated with 3-aminopropyltriethoxy silane and glycidoxypropyltrimethoxy silane to improve the inherent limitations of banana fibers, namely its poor cell adhesion. The fibers’ modification was evaluated by inverse gas chromatography (IGC). Similar γ s d values were observed between the RBF and silane-treated fibers (39–41 mJ/m2), which indicates similar reactivity towards apolar probes. However, the decrease in the entropic parameter indicates the silane covalent bonding with the cellulose chains making a stiffer structure. Organosilane grafting was confirmed by an increased basic character in the silane-treated fibers (Kb/Ka from 1.03 to 2.81). The surface morphology also changed towards higher contact area (SBET increases 6.7 times) and porosity (Dp increases up to 67%). Both morphological and functional group reactivity changes suggest that the organosilane treatment offers new opportunities for these fibers to be used as adsorbents for proteins as well as to cell adhesion. Therefore, IGC proved a simple and viable technique in the characterization of silane-treated fibers.

Graphical abstract

Keywords

Banana fibers Organosilane coupling agent Inverse gas chromatography 3-Aminopropyltriethoxy silane Glycidoxypropyltrimethoxy silane 

Notes

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank the National program for Scientific Equipment Renewal, POCI 2010, for sponsoring IGC work (FEDER and Foundation for Science and Technology). The Indian authors would like to thank the Department of Science and Technology, New Delhi for the financial support of the project.

References

  1. Abdelmouleh M, Boufi S, Salah A, Belgacem M, Gandini A (2002) Interaction of silane coupling agents with cellulose. Langmuir 18:3203–3208CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Abdelmouleh M, Boufi S, Belgacem M, Duarte AP, Salah AB, Gandini A (2004) Modification of cellulosic fibres with functionalised silanes: development of surface properties. Int J Biol Macromol 24:43–54Google Scholar
  3. Alonso E, Faria M, Ferreira A, Cordeiro N (2018) Influence of the matrix and polymerization methods on the synthesis of BC/PANi nanocomposites: an IGC study. Cellulose 25:2343–2354CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Biazar E, Majid H, Asefnezhad A, Montazeri N (2011) The relationship between cellular adhesion and surface roughness in polystyrene modified by microwave plasma radiation. Int J Nanomed 6:631–639CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Brunauer S, Emmet P, Teller E (1938) Adsorption of gases in multimolecular layers. J Am Chem Soc 60:309–319CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Cordeiro N, Gouveia C, Moraes AGO, Amico SC (2011) Natural fibers characterization by inverse gas chromatography. Carbohydr Polym 84:110–117CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Cordeiro N, Faria M, Abraham E, Pothan L (2013) Assessment of the changes in the cellulosic surface of micro and nano banana fibres due to saponin treatment. Carbohydr Polym 98:1065–1071CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Deepa B, Abraham E, Cordeiro N, Mozetic M, Mathew AP, Oksman K, Faria M, Thomas S, Pothan LA (2015) Utilization of various lignocellulosic biomass for the production of nanocellulose: a comparative study. Cellulose 22:1075–1090CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Dowling D, Miller I, Adhaoui M, Gallagher W (2011) Effect of surface wettability and topography on the adhesion of osteosarcoma cells on plasma-modified polystyrene. J Biomater Appl 26:327–347CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Fan M, Dai D, Huang B (2012) Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy for natural fibres. In: Salih SM (ed) Fourier transform—materials analysis, pp 45–68Google Scholar
  11. Faria M, Vilela C, Silvestre AJD, Deepa B, Resnike M, Freire CSR, Cordeiro N (2019) Physicochemical surface properties of bacterial cellulose/polymethacrylate nanocomposites: an approach by inverse gas chromatography. Carbohydr Polym 206:86–93CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Fernandes SCM, Sadocco P, Alonso-Varona A, Palomare T, Eceiza A, Silvestre AJD, Mondragon I, Freire CSR (2013) Bioinspired antimicrobial and biocompatible bacterial cellulose membranes obtained by surface functionalization with aminoalkyl groups. ACS Appl Mater Interfaces 5:3290–3297CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Frone AN, Panaitescu DM, Chiulan J, Nicolae CA, Casarica A, Gabor AR, Trusca R, Damian CM, Purcar V, Alexandrescu E, Stanescu PO (2018) Surface treatment of bacterial cellulose in mild, eco-friendly conditions. Coatings 8:221CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Goss K (1997) Considerations about the adsorption of organic molecules from the gas phase to surfaces: implication for inverse gas chromatography and the prediction of adsorption coefficients. J Colloid Interface Sci 190:241–249CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Gwon JG, Lee SY, Doh GH, Kim JH (2010) Characterization of chemically modified wood fibers using FTIR spectroscopy for biocomposites. J Appl Polym Sci 116:3212–3219Google Scholar
  16. Hoebbel D, Nacken M, Schmidt H (1998) A NMR study on the hydrolysis, condensation and epoxide ring-opening reaction in sols and gels of the system glycidoxypropyltrimethoxysilane-water-titaniumtetraethoxide. J Sol Gel Sci Technol 12:169–179CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Ifuku S, Yano H (2015) Effect of a silane coupling agent on the mechanical properties of a microfibrillated cellulose composite. Int J Biol Macromol 74:428–432CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Jackson P, Huglin M (1995) Use of inverse gas chromatography to measure diffusion coefficients in crosslinked polymers at different temperatures. Eur Polym J 31:63–65CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Khanjanzadeh H, Behrooz R, Bahramifar N, Altmutter W, Bacher M, Edler M, Griesser T (2018) Surface chemical functionalization of cellulose nanocrystals by 3-aminopropyltriethoxysilane. Int J Biol Macromol 106:1288–1296CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Mills R, Gardner D, Wimmer R (2008) Inverse gas chromatography for determining the dispersive surface free energy and acid-base interactions of sheet molding compound—part II 14 ligno-cellulosic fiber types for possible composite reinforcement. J Appl Polym Sci 110:3880–3888CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Mohd NH, Ismail NFH, Zahari JI, Fathilah WFW, Kargarzadeh H, Ramli S, Ahmad I, Yarmo MA, Othaman R (2016) Effect of aminosilane modification on nanocrystalline cellulose properties. J Nanomater. Article ID 4804271, 8 pGoogle Scholar
  22. Oss V (1988) Interfacial Lifshitz-van der Waals and polar interactions in macroscopic system. Chem Rev 88:927–941CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Pujiasih S, Masykura A, Kusumaningsih T, Saputra OA (2018) Silylation and characterization of microcrystalline cellulose isolated from indonesian native oil palm empty fruit bunch. Carbohydr Polym 184:74–81CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Robles E, Csóka L, Labidi J (2018) Effect of reaction conditions on the surface modification of cellulose nanofibrils with aminopropyl triethoxysilane. Coatings 8:139CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Salon M, Abdelmouleh M, Boufi S, Belgacem M, Gandini A (2005) Silane adsorption onto cellulose fibers: hydrolysis and condensation reactions. J Colloid Interface Sci 289:249–261CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Salon M, Gerbaud G, Abdelmouleh M, Bruzzese C, Boufi S, Belgacem M (2007) Studies of interactions between silane coupling agents and cellulose fibers with liquid and solid-state NMR. Magn Reson Chem 45:473–483CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Schultz J, Lavielle L, Martin C (1987) The role of the interface in carbon-fibre epoxy composites. J Adhes 23:45–60CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Taokaew S, Phisalaphong M, Newby B (2015) Modification of bacterial cellulose with organosilanes to improve attachment and spreading of human fibroblasts. Cellulose 22:2311–2324CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Thakur VK, Thakur MK, Gupta RK (2013a) Rapid synthesis of graft copolymers from natural cellulose fibers. Carbohydr Polym 98:820–828CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Thakur VK, Thakur MK, Gupta RK (2013b) Synthesis of lignocellulosic polymer with improved chemical resistance through free radical polymerization. Int J Biol Macromol 61:121–126CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Thakur VK, Thakur MK, Gupta RK (2013c) Graft copolymers from cellulose: synthesis, characterization and evaluation. Carbohydr Polym 97:18–25CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Thakur VK, Thakur MK, Gupta RK (2013d) Development of functionalized cellulosic biopolymers by graft copolymerization. Int J Biol Macromol 62:44–51CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Thakur VK, Thakur MK, Gupta RK (2014a) Graft copolymers of natural fibers for green composites. Carbohydr Polym 104:87–93CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Thakur MK, Gupta RK, Thakur VK (2014b) Surface modification of cellulose using silane coupling agent. Carbohydr Polym 111:849–855CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Thakur MK, Thakur VK, Gupta RK, Pappu A (2016) Synthesis and applications of biodegradable soy based graft copolymers: a review. ACS Sustain Chem Eng 4:1–17CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Thielmann F (2004) Introduction into the characterization of porous materials by inverse gas chromatography. J Chromatogr A 1037:115–123CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Xie Y, Hill C, Xiao Z, Militz H, Mai C (2010) Silane coupling agents used for natural fiber/polymer composites: a review. Compos Part A 41:806–819CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature B.V. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.LB3, Faculty of Science and EngineeringUniversity of MadeiraFunchalPortugal
  2. 2.Department of ChemistryBishop Moore CollegeMavelikaraIndia
  3. 3.CICECO – Aveiro Institute of Materials and Águeda School of Technology and ManagementUniversity of AveiroÁguedaPortugal
  4. 4.CIIMAR - Interdisciplinary Centre of Marine and Environmental ResearchUniversity of PortoMatosinhosPortugal

Personalised recommendations