Thermal characterization of starch-based polymers produced by Ophiostoma spp

Article

Abstract

The thermal behavior of modified starches (MS) produced by biosynthetic pathway is described based on a comparative analysis with native starches (NS). MS were produced by fermentation in presence of Ophiostoma spp. cultures. Thermogravimetric analysis (TG) with successive derivatives (DTG) and differential scanning calorimetry (DSC) were used for this study. NS results showed a single peak dominating both the TG (DTG) and DSC plots. A double thermal transition event was detected in samples of MS. The procedural decomposition temperature (TiTf; lowest onset temperature of initial and final mass change) was carried out within a narrow interval of temperatures for NS (610–640 °C). This interval could not be reached within the 1,000 °C range in MS. Residues higher than 10% were recorded for MS at this temperature. The presence of the double thermal transition in MS is discussed.

Keywords

Ophiostoma spp. Starch modifications Modified and native starches thermal analysis 

References

  1. 1.
    Aggarwal P, Dollimore D. A comparative study of the degradation of different starches using thermal analysis. Talanta. 1996;43:1527–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Yu L, Christie G. Measurements of starch thermal transitions using differential scanning calorimetry. Carbohydr Polym. 2001;46:179–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Derycke V, Vandeputte GE, Vermeylen R, De Man W, Goderis B, Koch MJ, et al. Starch gelatinization and amylose-lipid interactions during rice parboiling investigated by temperature resolved wide angle X-ray scattering and differential scanning calorimetry. J Cereal Sci. 2005;42:334–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Wasserman LA, Signorelli M, Schiraldi A, Yuryev V, Boggini G, Bertini S, et al. Preparation of wheat-resistant starch: treatment of gels and DSC characterization. J Therm Anal Calorim. 2007;87(I):153–7.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Puncha-Arnon S, Pathipanawat W, Puttanlek C, Rungsardthong V, Uttapap D. Effects of relative granule size and gelatinization temperature on paste and gel properties of starch blends. Food Res Int. 2008;41:552–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Tran T, Piyachomkwan K, Sriroth K. Gelatinization and thermal properties of modified cassava starches. Starch/Stärke. 2007;59:46–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Hagenimana A, Pu P, Ding X. Study on thermal and rheological properties of native rice starches and their corresponding mixtures. Food Res Int. 2005;38:257–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Berland S, Relkin P, Launay B. Calorimetric and rheological properties of wheat flour suspensions and doughs: effects of wheat types and milling procedure. J Therm Anal Calorim. 2003;71:311–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Bocharnikova I, Wasserman LA, Krivandin AV, Fornal J, Baszczak W, Chemykh V, et al. Structure and thermodynamic melting parameters of wheat starches with different amylase content. J Thermal Anal Calorim. 2003;74:681–95.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Elfstrand L, Eliasson A, Jonsson M, Reslow M, Wahlgren M. From starch to starch microspheres: factors controlling the microspheres quality. Starch/Stärke. 2006;58:381–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Sain M, Jeng R, Hubbes M. US Patent Appl., No. 11/764683, 2007.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Jeng R, Huang C, Sain M, Hubbes M, Rodriguez A, Saville A. Starch-like exopolysaccharide produced by the filamentous fungi Ophiostoma ulmi and O. novo-ulmi. Forest Pathol. 2007;37:80–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Huang C, Jeng R, Sain M, Saville B, Hubbes M. Production, characterization, and mechanical properties of starch modified by Ophiostoma spp. Bioresources. 2006;1:257–69.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Selbmann L, Stingele F, Petruccioli M. Exopolysaccharide production by filamentous fungi: the example of Botryosphaeria rhodina. Antonie van Leeuwenhook. 2003;84:135–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Myllarinen P, Partanen R, Seppala J, Forssell P. Effect of glycerol on behaviour of amylose and amylopectin films. Carbohydr Polym. 2002;355–61.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Sain M, Jeng R. Disclosure documents, Biocap-NSERC Report (2006, 2005) (Laboratory of Pathology, Faculty of Forestry, University of Toronto, Canada).Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Przybył K, Dahm H, Ciesielska A, Molinski K. Cellulolytic activity and virulence of Ophiostoma ulmi and O. novo-ulmi isolates. Forest Pathol. 2006;36:58–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Martin J, Solla A, Coimbra M, Gil L. Metabolic distinction of Ulmus minor xylem tissues after inoculation with Ophiostoma novo-ulmi. Phytochemistry. 2005;66:2458–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Binz T, Canevascini G. Xylanases from the Dutch elm disease pathogens Ophiostoma ulmi and Ophiostoma novo-ulmi. Physiol Mol Plant Pathol. 1996;49:159–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest, Hungary 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Center of Biocomposites and Biomaterials Earth Science Center/ForestryUniversity of TorontoTorontoCanada

Personalised recommendations