Conversion of Potato Starch and Peel Waste to High Value Nanocrystals

  • Pinky Raigond
  • Baswaraj Raigond
  • Tarvinder Kochhar
  • Ankita Sood
  • Brajesh Singh


The present study aimed to convert starch and potato peel waste to nanocrystals. Starch nanocrystals were prepared using two methodologies: direct acid hydrolysis and enzyme pretreatment followed by acid hydrolysis. Direct hydrolysis broke down the starch granules to nanocrystals in 12 days. Enzyme pretreatment with starch hydrolytic enzymes (α-amylase and amyloglucosidase) reduced the time for preparation of starch nanocrystals by 6 days. Starch nanocrystals of optimum size were obtained with both the treatments and the resultant size ranged from 10 to 50 nm. Nanocrystals were disk-like platelets in appearance. Cellulose nanocrystals were derived from cellulosic material in the potato peel. Cellulose was isolated from peel waste with alkali treatment. Further, cellulose nanocrystals from potato peel and cellulose microcrystalline were prepared by acid hydrolysis. Microscopic images revealed that the aqueous suspension of cellulose nanocrystals derived from potato peel were single rod shaped, whereas those derived from cellulose microcrystalline were rod-like nanoparticles, agglomerated in the form of bundles including some of the rods in single units (well separated). The size of potato peel nanocrystals ranged from 40 to 100 nm (length) and cellulose microcrystalline ranged from 4 to 20 nm (diameter) by 110 to 250, given 4 to 20 nm (length), respectively. As starch nanocrystals as well as cellulose nanocrystals are derived from biopolymer, both can be considered safe for humans and the environment. Moreover, the biodegradable nature of these nanocrystals makes them superior over metallic nanoparticles, particularly in the field of nanocomposites.


Acid hydrolysis Cellulose nanocrystals Potato Potato peel Starch nanocrystals Transmission electron microscope 



Authors are thankful to Indian Council of Agriculture Research (ICAR), New Delhi for its support by sanctioning a project titled “Biodegradable and antimicrobial nanocomposite films based on potato starch for food packaging application” through Consortium Research Platform (CRP) on Nanotechnology.

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Human and Animal Rights and Informed Consent

This article does not contain any studies with human or animal subjects.


  1. Averous L, Halley PJ (2009) Biocomposites based on plasticized starch. Biofuels Bioprod Biorefin 3(3):329–343CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Beck-Candanedo S, Roman M, Gray DG (2005) Effect of reaction conditions on the properties and behavior of wood cellulose nanocrystal suspensions. Biomacromolecules 6:1048–1054CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Bica CID, Borsali R, Rochas C, Geissler E (2006) Dynamics of cellulose whiskers spatially trapped in agarose hydrogels. Macromolecules 39:3622–3627CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Cao X, Dong H, Li CM (2007) New nanocomposite materials reinforced with flax cellulose nanocrystals in waterborne polyurethane. Biomacromolecules 8(3):899–904CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Chen G, Wei M, Chen J, Huang J, Dufresne A, Chang PR (2008) Simultaneous reinforcing and toughening: new nanocomposites of waterborne polyurethane filled with low loading level of starch nanocrystals. Polymer 49(7):1860–1870CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Chen Y, Liu C, Chang PR, Cao X, Anderson DP (2009) Bionanocomposites based on pea starch and cellulose nanowhiskers hydrolysed from pea hull fibre: effect of hydrolysis time. Carbohydr Polym 76:607–615CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Chen D, Lawton D, Thompson MR, Liu Q (2012) Biocomposites reinforced with cellulose nanocrystals derived from potato peel waste. Carbohydr Polym 90:709–716CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Dufresne A (2010) Natural rubber green nanocomposites. In: Ranimol S, Thomas S (eds) Rubber nanocomposites: preparation, properties, and applications. John Wiley & Sons, Singapore, pp 113–145Google Scholar
  9. Fuglie KO (1999) Raw materials for starch in Asia: some economic considerations. UPWARD [Users’ perspective with agricultural Research and Development network] field Notes,7(2): 5–7Google Scholar
  10. Hafraoui S, Nishiyama Y, Putaux J-L, Heux L, Dubreuil F, Rochas C (2008) The shape and size distribution of crystalline nanoparticles prepared by acid hydrolysis of native cellulose. Biomacromolecules 9:57–65CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Kim J-Y, Park D-J, Lim S-T (2008) Fragmentation of waxy rice starch granules by enzymatic hydrolysis. Cereal Chem 85(2):182–187CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Lani NS, Ngadi N, Johari A, Jusoh M (2014) Isolation, characterization and application of nanocellulose from oil palm empty fruit bunch fiber as nanocomposites. J Nanomater., Article ID 702538, 9 pages.
  13. LeCorre D, Bras J, Dufense A (2012a) Influence of native starch’s properties on starch nanocrystals thermal properties. Carbohydr Polym 87:658–666CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. LeCorre D, Vahanian E, Dufresne A, Bras J (2012b) Enzymatic pretreatment for preparing starch nanocrystals. Biomacromolecules 13:132–137CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Li Y, Ragauskas AJ (2011) Cellulose nano whiskers as reinforcing filler in polyurethanes. In: Reddy B (ed.). Advances in diverse industrial applications of nanocomposites, ISBN: 978–953–307-202-9. pp 17–36Google Scholar
  16. Lin N, Huang J, Chang PR, Feng L, Yu J (2011) Effect of polysaccharide nanocrystals on structure, properties, and drug release kinetics of alginate-based microspheres. Colloids Surf B: Biointerfaces 85(2):270–279CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Lin N, Huang J, Dufresne A (2012) Preparation, properties and applications of polysaccharide nanocrystals in advanced functional nanomaterials: a review. Nano 4:3274–3294Google Scholar
  18. Morais JPS, de F Rosa MF, Filho M d s M d S, Nascimento LD, Nascimento DM, Cassales AR (2013) Extraction and characterization of nanocellulose structures from raw cotton linter. Carbohydr Polym 91:229–235CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Othman SH, Rashid SA, Ghazi TI, Abdullah N (2012) Dispersion and stabilization of photocatalytic TiO2 nanoparticles in aqueous suspension for coating applications. J Nanomater., Article ID 718214, 10 pages
  20. Pelissari FM, Sobral PJA, Menegalli FC (2014) Isolation and characterization of cellulose nanofibers from banana peels. Cellulose 21:417–432CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Qua EH, Hornsby PR, Sharma HSS, Lyons G, McCall RD (2009) Preparation and characterization of poly(vinyl alcohol) nanocomposites made from cellulose nanofibers. J Appl Polym Sci 113(4):2238–2247. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Raigond P, Ezekiel R, Kaundal B (2014) Starch fractions of cooked potatoes at low temperature. Potato J 41(1):58–67Google Scholar
  23. Raigond P, Ezekiel R, Singh B, Dutt S, Joshi A and Rinki (2015) Resistant starch production technologies—a review. Potato J 42(2): 81–94Google Scholar
  24. Raigond P, Raigond B, Kaundal B, Singh B, Joshi A, Dutt S (2017) Effect of zinc nanoparticles on antioxidative system of potato plants. J Env Biol 38:435–439Google Scholar
  25. Rajisha KR, Maria HJ, Pothan LA, Ahmad Z, Thomas S (2014) Preparation and characterization of potato starch nanocrystal reinforced natural rubber nanocomposites. Int J Biol Macromol 67:147–153CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. Rosa MF, Medeiros EF, Malmonge JA, Gregorsky KS, Wood DF, Mattoso LHC et al (2010) Cellulose nanowhiskers from coconut husk fibers: effect of preparation conditions on their thermal and morphological behavior. Carbohydr Polym 81(1):83–92CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Rosa SML, Rehman N, de Miranda MIG, Nachtigall SMB, Bica CID (2012) Chlorine-free extraction of cellulose from rice husk and whisker isolation. Carbohydr Polym 87:1131–1138CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Samir M, Alloin F, Dufresne A (2005) Review of recent research into cellulosic whiskers, their properties and their application in nanocomposite field. Biomacromolecules 6(2):612–626CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Singh B, Mehta A, Raigond P (2014) Management practices to reduce the post harvest losses in potatoes. In: Souvenir of national seminar on ‘post harvest management and processing of potatoes for increasing food security in India’. pp: 1–5Google Scholar
  30. Singh B, Raigond P, Joshi A, Mehta A, Singh BP (2016) A manual on potato processing in India. CPRI Technical Bulletin No. 48 (Revised). ICAR- Central Potato Research Institute, Shimla, pp 1Google Scholar
  31. Valodkar M, Thakore S (2011) Isocyanate crosslinked reactive starch nanoparticles for thermo-responsive conducting applications. Carbohydr Res 345(16):2354–2360CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Wu Y, Xianfeng D, Ge H, Lv Z (2011) Preparation of microporous starch by glucoamylase and ultrasound. Starch 63:217–225CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Zhang X, Huang J, Chang PR, Li J, Chen Y, Wang D, Yu J, Chen J (2010) Structure and properties of polysaccharide nanocrystal-doped supramolecular hydrogels based on cyclodextrin inclusion. Polymer 51(19):4398–4407CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© European Association for Potato Research 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Crop Physiology, Biochemistry and Post Harvest TechnologyICAR-Central Potato Research InstituteShimlaIndia
  2. 2.Plant Protection DivisionICAR-Central Potato Research InstituteShimlaIndia

Personalised recommendations