Advertisement

Cellulose

pp 1–16 | Cite as

Influence of post-oxidation reactions on the physicochemical properties of TEMPO-oxidized cellulose nanofibers before and after amidation

  • L. A. Calderón-Vergara
  • S. A. Ovalle-Serrano
  • C. Blanco-Tirado
  • M. Y. CombarizaEmail author
Original Research
  • 39 Downloads

Abstract

During TEMPO-mediated oxidation of cellulose, primary alcohols on the surface ideally undergo oxidation to carboxylic acids. However, it is well known that some of these hydroxyl groups partially oxidize to aldehydes. To increase the degree of oxidation (DO) of nanocellulose, these unreacted aldehydes can be fully oxidized to carboxylic acids employing various strategies. We performed post-oxidation reactions using NaClO2, on TEMPO-Oxidized Cellulose Nanofibers (TOCN) to investigate how this reaction influenced the physicochemical properties of nanocelulose before and after amidation with octadecylamine (ODA). We report on an increase in the content of carboxylate in TOCN (1.57 mmol/g of cellulose) up 40% after post-oxidation with NaClO2 (2.20 mmol/g of cellulose). These results indicate that with TEMPO-mediated oxidation, 1.57 mmol of hydroxymethyl groups per gram of cellulose were completely oxidized to –COOH, and after treatment with NaClO2, about 0.63 mmol of partially-oxidized alcohols (aldehyde groups) on TOCN were fully oxidized to COOH. Theoretical HLB values of 11.04 and 11.13 for TOCN and post-oxidized TOCN (TOCN-P) indicate that these materials behave as hydrophilic o/w surfactants or emulsifying agents with high affinity for polar phases. They also form highly stable dispersions in water due to an increased charge density as indicated by ζ-potential values of -56 mV for TOCN and -64 mV for TOCN-P. Low contact angles (CA) of 24º and 21º for TOCN and TOCN-P films confirm their hydrophilic nature. After amidation reactions with ODA, we observe a 73% and an 82% decrease in carboxylate content for TOCN and TOCN-P. These values can be related with the degree of coupling (DC) leading to amide formation on the nanocellulose surface, i.e., about 1.14 and 1.80 mmol of amide units were coupled per gram of cellulose on TOCN-ODA and TOCN-P-ODA. ζ-potential values decreased 34% and 52% after amidation, to -37 mV and -31 mV for TOCN-ODA and TOCN-P-ODA, indicating a low stability of these materials in water dispersions. Theoretical HLB values < 8.6 suggest the ability of these materials to act as wetting/spreading agents with poor dispersibility in water. In addition, high CA (> 125º) films illustrate the effect of octadecylamine alkyl chains on the hydrophobic properties of the nanocellulose’s surface. Thermal analysis indicates that amidation reactions can effectively shield in the nanocellulose’s surface from thermal degradation from by increasing the decomposition temperature from around 296 °C for “naked” TOCN to > 330 °C for the “protected” amidated nanocellulose.

Keywords

TEMPO-oxidized cellulose nanofibers, TOCN, post-oxidation NaClO2 Octadecylamine Amidation Surface free energy (SFE) 

Notes

Acknowledgments

We thank Guatiguará Technology Park and the Central Research Laboratory Facility (X-ray and microscopy laboratories) at Universidad Industrial de Santander for infrastructural support. We thank Professor Juan Hinestroza director of the Textiles Nanotechnology Lab, College of Human Ecology, Cornell University for TEM analyses and discussion; we also acknowledge use of the Cornell Center for Materials Research Shared Facilities which are supported through the NSF MRSEC program (DMR-1719875) and an INVEST grant via the Cornell Center for Materials Research (M01-1985) for TEM analyses. We thank Andrés J. Calderón, Ph.D. for assistance with numerical computations for SFE calculations. We also acknowledge a graduate fellowship from COLCIENCIAS Program No. 567/2012 and financial support from Universidad Industrial de Santander Vice-chancellor for Research Office (Grant 2316/2017).

Supplementary material

10570_2019_2849_MOESM1_ESM.docx (1.1 mb)
Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 1143 kb)

References

  1. Akira Isogai TS, Saito T, Fukuzumi H (2011) TEMPO-oxidized cellulose nanofibers. Nanoscale 3:71–85CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bashar MM, Zhu H, Yamamoto S, Mitsuishi M (2017) Superhydrophobic surfaces with fluorinated cellulose nanofiber assemblies for oil-water separation. RSC Adv 7:37168–37174.  https://doi.org/10.1039/c7ra06316d CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Benkaddour A, Journoux-Lapp C, Jradi K et al (2014) Study of the hydrophobization of TEMPO-oxidized cellulose gel through two routes: amidation and esterification process. J Mater Sci 49:2832–2843.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10853-013-7989-y CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Besbes I, Alila S, Boufi S (2011) Nanofibrillated cellulose from TEMPO-oxidized eucalyptus fibres: effect of the carboxyl content. Carbohydr Polym 84:975–983.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carbpol.2010.12.052 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Besemer A (1993) The bromide catalized hypochlorite oxidation of starch and inulin. Delft University of TechnologyGoogle Scholar
  6. Bhatnagar A (2005) Processing of Cellulose Nanofiber-reinforced Composites. J Reinf Plast Compos 24:1259–1268.  https://doi.org/10.1177/0731684405049864 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bledzki AK, Mamun AA, Lucka-Gabor M, Gutowski VS (2008) The effects of acetylation on properties of flax fibre and its polypropylene composites. Express Polym Lett 2:413–422.  https://doi.org/10.3144/expresspolymlett.2008.50 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bragd PL, Besemer AC, Van Bekkum H (2000) Bromide-free TEMPO-mediated oxidation of primary alcohol groups in starch and methyl α-D-glucopyranoside. Carbohydr Res 328:355–363.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0008-6215(00)00109-9 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Chen W, Yu H, Liu Y et al (2011) Individualization of cellulose nanofibers from wood using high-intensity ultrasonication combined with chemical pretreatments. Carbohydr Polym 83:1804–1811.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carbpol.2010.10.040 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Chen Y, Geng B, Ru J et al (2017) Comparative characteristics of TEMPO-oxidized cellulose nanofibers and resulting nanopapers from bamboo, softwood, and hardwood pulps. Cellulose 24:4831–4844.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10570-017-1478-4 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Cunha AG, Freire CSR, Silvestre AJD et al (2007) Highly hydrophobic biopolymers prepared by the surface pentafluorobenzoylation of cellulose substrates. Biomacromol 8:1347–1352.  https://doi.org/10.1021/bm0700136 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Dai L, Wang B, Long Z et al (2015) Properties of hydroxypropyl guar/TEMPO-oxidized cellulose nanofibrils composite films. Cellulose 22:3117–3126.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10570-015-0691-2 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. David R, Williams KN (1980) A mild oxidation of aldehydes to α, β-unsaturated aldehydes. Tetrahedron Lett 21:4417–4420CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Davidson TC, Newman RH, Ryan MJ (2004) Variations in the fibre repeat between samples of cellulose I from different sources. Carbohydr Res 339:2889–2893.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carres.2004.10.005 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. French AD (2014) Idealized powder diffraction patterns for cellulose polymorphs. Cellulose 21:885–896.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10570-013-0030-4 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Fukuzumi H (2012) Studies on structures and properties of TEMPO-oxidized cellulose nanofibril films. 博士論文 98Google Scholar
  17. Fukuzumi H, Saito T, Okita Y, Isogai A (2010) Thermal stabilization of TEMPO-oxidized cellulose. Polym Degrad Stab 95:1502–1508.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.polymdegradstab.2010.06.015 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Gadhave A (2014) Determination of Hydrophilic-Lipophilic Balance Value. 3:573–575Google Scholar
  19. Gert EV, Torgashov VI, Zubets OV, Kaputskii FN (2005) Preparation and properties of enterosorbents based on carboxylated microcrystalline cellulose. Cellulose 12:517–526.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10570-005-7134-4 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Gómez FN, Combariza MY, Blanco-Tirado C (2017) Facile cellulose nanofibrils amidation using a ‘one-pot’ approach. Cellulose 24:717–730.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10570-016-1174-9 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Griffin WC (1949) Classification of surface active agents by HLB. J Soc Cosmet Chem 1:311–315Google Scholar
  22. Habibi Y, Chanzy H, Vignon MR (2006) TEMPO-mediated surface oxidation of cellulose whiskers. Cellulose 13:679–687.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10570-006-9075-y CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Hasan M, Gopakumar DA, Arumughan V et al (2019) Robust superhydrophobic cellulose nanofiber aerogel for multifunctional environmental applications. Polymers (Basel) 11:1–14.  https://doi.org/10.3390/polym11030495 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. He M, Xu M, Zhang L (2013) Controllable Stearic Acid Crystal Induced High Hydrophobicity on Cellulose Film Surface.  https://doi.org/10.1021/am3026536 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. He M, Lu A, Zhang L (2014) Advances in cellulose hydrophobicity improvement. In: Food additives and packaging. ACS Symposium, pp 241–274Google Scholar
  26. Huang CF, Tu CW, Lee RH et al (2019) Study of various diameter and functionality of TEMPO-oxidized cellulose nanofibers on paraquat adsorptions. Polym Degrad Stab 161:206–212.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.polymdegradstab.2019.01.023 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Iskalieva A, Yimmou BM, Gogate PR et al (2012) Cavitation assisted delignification of wheat straw: a review. Ultrason Sonochem 19:984–993.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ultsonch.2012.02.007 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. Isogai A (2013) Wood nanocelluloses: fundamentals and applications as new bio-based nanomaterials. J Wood Sci 59:449–459.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10086-013-1365-z CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Isogai A, Zhou Y (2019) Diverse nanocelluloses prepared from TEMPO-oxidized wood cellulose fibers: nanonetworks, nanofibers, and nanocrystals. Curr Opin Solid State Mater Sci 23:101–106.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cossms.2019.01.001 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Isogai T, Saito T, Isogai A (2010) TEMPO electromediated oxidation of some polysaccharides including regenerated cellulose fiber. Biomacromol 11:1593–1599.  https://doi.org/10.1021/bm1002575 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Isogai A, Hänninen T, Fujisawa S, Saito T (2018) Progress in Polymer Science Review: catalytic oxidation of cellulose with nitroxyl radicals under aqueous conditions. Prog Polym Sci 86:122–148.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.progpolymsci.2018.07.007 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Johnson RK, Zink-Sharp A, Glasser WG (2011) Preparation and characterization of hydrophobic derivatives of TEMPO-oxidized nanocelluloses. Cellulose 18:1599–1609.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10570-011-9579-y CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Kato Y, Matsuo R, Isogai A (2003) Oxidation process of water-soluble starch in TEMPO-mediated system. 51:69–75Google Scholar
  34. Khoshkava V, Kamal MR (2013) Effect of surface energy on dispersion and mechanical properties of polymer/nanocrystalline cellulose nanocomposites. Biomacromol 14:3155–3163.  https://doi.org/10.1021/bm400784j CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Lasseuguette E (2008) Grafting onto microfibrils of native cellulose. Cellulose 15:571–580.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10570-008-9200-1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Lichtenstein K, Lavoine N (2017) Toward a deeper understanding of the thermal degradation mechanism of nanocellulose. Polym Degrad Stab 146:53–60.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.polymdegradstab.2017.09.018 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Lif A, Stenstad P, Syverud K et al (2010) Fischer-Tropsch diesel emulsions stabilised by microfibrillated cellulose and nonionic surfactants. J Colloid Interface Sci 352:585–592.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcis.2010.08.052 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. Lin C, Zeng T, Wang Q et al (2018) Effects of the conditions of the TEMPO/NaBr/NaClO system on carboxyl groups, degree of polymerization, and yield of the oxidized cellulose. BioResources 13:5965–5975Google Scholar
  39. Mandal A, Chakrabarty D (2011) Isolation of nanocellulose from waste sugarcane bagasse (SCB) and its characterization. Carbohydr Polym 86:1291–1299CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Mishra SP, Manent AS, Chabot B, Daneault C (2012) The use of sodium chlorite in post-oxidation of TEMPO-oxidized pulp: effect on pulp characteristics and nanocellulose yield. J Wood Chem Technol 32:137–148.  https://doi.org/10.1080/02773813.2011.624666 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Missoum K, Bras J, Belgacem MN (2012) Organization of aliphatic chains grafted on nanofibrillated cellulose and influence on final properties. Cellulose 19:1957–1973.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10570-012-9780-7 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Morán JI, Alvarez VA, Cyras VP, Vázquez A (2008) Extraction of cellulose and preparation of nanocellulose from sisal fibers. Cellulose 15:149–159.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10570-007-9145-9 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Okita Y, Saito T, Isogai A (2010) Entire surface oxidation of various cellulose microfibrils by TEMPO mediated oxidation. Biomacromolecules 11:1696–1700CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Okita Y, Fujisawa S, Saito T, Isogai A (2011) TEMPO-oxidized cellulose nanofibrils dispersed in organic solvents. Biomacromol 12:518–522.  https://doi.org/10.1021/bm101255x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Ovalle-Serrano SA, Blanco-Tirado C, Combariza MY (2018a) Exploring the composition of raw and delignified Colombian fique fibers, tow and pulp. Cellulose 25:151–165.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10570-017-1599-9 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Ovalle-Serrano SA, Gómez FN, Blanco-Tirado C, Combariza MY (2018b) Isolation and characterization of cellulose nanofibrils from Colombian Fique decortication by-products. Carbohydr Polym 189:169–177.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carbpol.2018.02.031 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  47. Rodionova G, Eriksen Gregersen (2012) TEMPO-oxidized cellulose nanofiber films: effect of surface morphology on water resistance. Cellulose 19:1115–1123.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10570-012-9721-5 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Rohaizu R, Wanrosli WD (2017) Sono-assisted TEMPO oxidation of oil palm lignocellulosic biomass for isolation of nanocrystalline cellulose. Ultrason Sonochem 34:631–639.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ultsonch.2016.06.040 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  49. Rudawska A, Jacniacka E (2009) Analysis for determining surface free energy uncertainty by the Owen – Wendt method. Int J Adhes Adhes 29:451–457.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijadhadh.2008.09.008 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 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. Biomacromol 5:1983–1989.  https://doi.org/10.1021/bm0497769 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Saito T, Yanagisawa M, Isogai A (2005) TEMPO-mediated oxidation of native cellulose: SEC–MALLS analysis of water-soluble and -insoluble fractions in the oxidized products. Cellulose 12:305–315.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10570-004-5835-8 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Saito T, Okita Y, Nge TT et al (2006) TEMPO-mediated oxidation of native cellulose: microscopic analysis of fibrous fractions in the oxidized products. Carbohydr Polym 65:435–440.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carbpol.2006.01.034 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Saito T, Kimura S, Nishiyama Y, Isogai A (2007) Cellulose nanofibers prepared by TEMPO-mediated oxidation of native cellulose. Biomacromol 8:2485–2491.  https://doi.org/10.1021/bm0703970 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Sèbe G, Ham-Pichavant F, Ibarboure E et al (2012) Supramolecular structure characterization of cellulose II nanowhiskers produced by acid hydrolysis of cellulose I substrates. Biomacromol 13:570–578.  https://doi.org/10.1021/bm201777j CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 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 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Sehgal DVI (1994) A method for the high efficiency of water-soluble carbodiimide-mediated amidation. Anal Biochem 218:87–91CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Smith KC, Edionwe E, Michel B (2010) Conductimetric titrations: a predict-observe-explain activity for general chemistry. J Chem Educ 87:1217–1221.  https://doi.org/10.1021/ed100538q CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Sun B, Gu CJ, Ma JH, Liang BR (2005) Kinetic study on TEMPO-mediated selective oxidation of regenerated cellulose. Cellulose 12:59–66CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Sun X, Mei C, French AD et al (2018) Surface wetting behavior of nanocellulose-based composite films. Cellulose 25:5071–5087.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10570-018-1927-8 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Tang Z, Li W, Lin X et al (2017) TEMPO-Oxidized cellulose with high degree of oxidation. Polymers (Basel) 9:3–4.  https://doi.org/10.3390/polym9090421 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Wada M, Kondo T, Okano T (2003) Thermally induced crystal transformation from cellulose I[alpha] to I[beta]. Polym J 35:155–159.  https://doi.org/10.1295/polymj.35.155 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Wicaksono R, Syamsu K, Yuliasih I, Nasir M (2013) Cellulose nanofibers from cassava bagasse: characterization and application on tapioca-film. Chem Mater Res 3:79–87Google Scholar
  63. Xiao S, Gao R, Lu Y et al (2015) Fabrication and characterization of nanofibrillated cellulose and its aerogels from natural pine needles. Carbohydr Polym 119:202–209CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Xu Y, Kawata S, Hosoi K et al (2009) Thermomechanical properties of the silanized-kenaf/polystyrene composites. Express Polym Lett 3:657–664.  https://doi.org/10.3144/expresspolymlett.2009.82 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Yang H (2011) Investigation and characterization of oxidized cellulose and cellulose nanofiber films. Master thesis, McGill University, CanadaGoogle Scholar
  66. Zenkiewicz M (2006) New method of analysis of the surface free energy of polymeric materials calculated with Owens-Wendt and Neumann methods. Polimery/Polymers 51:584–587Google Scholar
  67. Zheng Y, Zheng M, Ma Z et al (2015) Sugar fatty acid esters. In: Polar lipids: biology, chemistry, and technology. AOCS Press, pp 215–243Google Scholar
  68. Zhou Y, Saito T, Bergström L, Isogai A (2018) Acid-free preparation of cellulose nanocrystals by TEMPO oxidation and subsequent cavitation. Biomacromol 19:633–639.  https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.biomac.7b01730 CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature B.V. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Escuela de Química, Universidad Industrial de SantanderBucaramangaColombia

Personalised recommendations