Biocompatible, Tunable, Multifunctional Adhesive Silk-PDA Composite Films for Modern Labeling Needs
Source abstract
Abstract
Adhesive labels are massively used in production processes and are ubiquitously present in nearly every product. However, their use often complicates the recycling of the materials they are applied to or leads to fragmentation, dispersing microplastics into the environment. We present here biopolymer-based adhesive films suitable for labeling applications by leveraging silk polymorphism in combination with mussel-inspired chemistry. Incorporating dopamine into the polymeric matrix introduces water-triggered adhesive properties and a plasticizing effect. Its utility can be further augmented through the addition of glycerol, which enables the formation of flexible and insoluble adhesive films. The versatility of form and function of the base biomaterial allows reshaping of protein films on demand and to create functional adhesive surfaces with tunable properties, opening possibilities for programmable biomaterial-based interfaces, that can be used either as laminates on a variety of different substrates or as standalone labels. Adhesive strength, preferred breakage interface, and degradation rates in water can all be customized to meet specific requirements underscoring the versatility and applicability of the platform.
Source: openalex_inverted_index · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Silk-based biomaterials and applications · Adhesion, Friction, and Surface Interactions · Polymer Surface Interaction Studies
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
Department of Biomedical Engineering
Tufts University
Department of Physics
Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering
References (61)
Show source-provided references
1. AWA Alexander Watson Associates. Global Pressure-Sensitive Label Market Study. 2017.
2. F. E. Label Indst. R. European Label Industry Reports Record Growth in 2021 but Faces Volatile Times in 2022 2022.
3. 10.1002/app.4704810.1002/app.47048 ↗
4. 10.1007/s10924-011-0299-z10.1007/s10924-011-0299-z ↗
5. Antosik A. K. · 2022
6. FINAT Whitepaper Labels Enabling PET Recycling. 2023.
7. 10.1111/cod.1255610.1111/cod.12556 ↗
8. Fairley M. · 2005 · 11610.1002/9780470995877.ch4 ↗
9. 10.1021/acs.est.3c0873410.1021/acs.est.3c08734 ↗
10. French Legislation Threatens Millions of Dollars of US Fruit and Vegetable Exports USDA. 2021.
11. S, W. Department of Ecology, S. of W. Assessment of Produce Sticker Technologies 2025 https://apps.ecology.wa.gov/publications/documents/2507041.pdf (accessed November 17, 2025).
12. Pegg E. · 2021
13. 10.1016/j.ijadhadh.2013.03.00210.1016/j.ijadhadh.2013.03.002 ↗
14. 10.3390/f1212170310.3390/f12121703 ↗
15. 10.1002/mame.20070029210.1002/mame.200700292 ↗
16. 10.1039/D3LP00224A10.1039/D3LP00224A ↗
17. 10.1002/(SICI)1099-1522(1998090)11:5%253C205:AID-PTS431%253E3.0.CO;2-J10.1002/(SICI)1099-1522(1998090)11:5%253C205:AID-PTS431%253E3.0.CO;2-J ↗
18. Cascadia Consulting. Washington Department of Ecology. 2024.
19. 10.1073/pnas.161206311410.1073/pnas.1612063114 ↗
20. 10.1038/s41565-024-01720-310.1038/s41565-024-01720-3 ↗
21. 10.1002/adma.20110447710.1002/adma.201104477 ↗
22. 10.1002/macp.20200006610.1002/macp.202000066 ↗
23. 10.1021/acsomega.2c0714910.1021/acsomega.2c07149 ↗
24. 10.1002/aelm.20200014010.1002/aelm.202000140 ↗
25. 10.1016/j.cis.2022.10268910.1016/j.cis.2022.102689 ↗
26. 10.1002/advs.20200478610.1002/advs.202004786 ↗
27. Lo Presti, M.; Ostrovsky-Snider, N.; Rizzo, G.; Portoghese, M.; Blasi, D.; Farinola, G. M.; Omenetto, F. G. The Role of Tyrosine in Protein-Dopamine Based Bioinspired Adhesives: The Stoichiometry That Maximizes Bonding Strength Front. Biomater. Sci. 2023; Vol. 2 10.3389/fbiom.2023.1184088.10.3389/fbiom.2023.1184088 ↗
28. 10.1002/adfm.20241421910.1002/adfm.202414219 ↗
29. 10.1002/smll.20180295310.1002/smll.201802953 ↗
30. 10.1002/adma.20150142510.1002/adma.201501425 ↗
31. 10.1002/adfm.20040040510.1002/adfm.200400405 ↗
32. 10.1021/acsenergylett.7b0001210.1021/acsenergylett.7b00012 ↗
33. 10.1021/acsabm.9b0095710.1021/acsabm.9b00957 ↗
34. 10.1021/acs.nanolett.5b0068010.1021/acs.nanolett.5b00680 ↗
35. 10.1007/s10853-008-2961-y10.1007/s10853-008-2961-y ↗
36. 10.1002/jbm.a.3302110.1002/jbm.a.33021 ↗
37. 10.1063/1.499895010.1063/1.4998950 ↗
38. 10.1002/(sici)1097-4628(19970118)63:3%253C401:aid-app17%253E3.3.co;2-910.1002/(sici)1097-4628(19970118)63:3%253C401:aid-app17%253E3.3.co;2-9 ↗
39. 10.1021/acsami.7b0977410.1021/acsami.7b09774 ↗
40. 10.1038/srep0543410.1038/srep05434 ↗
41. 10.1002/app.1995.07055041310.1002/app.1995.070550413 ↗
42. 10.1002/polb.2306510.1002/polb.23065 ↗
43. 10.1021/acsami.3c1292610.1021/acsami.3c12926 ↗
44. 10.1016/j.jiec.2016.11.00710.1016/j.jiec.2016.11.007 ↗
45. 10.1163/15685610376286470510.1163/156856103762864705 ↗
46. Standard Test Method for Peel Adhesion of Pressure-Sensitive Tape Am. Sociaty Test. Mater. 2003; Vol. 98 December 2002, pp 1–6 10.1520/D3330.10.1520/D3330 ↗
47. 10.1163/15685610778043747110.1163/156856107780437471 ↗
48. 10.1016/j.ijadhadh.2008.06.00210.1016/j.ijadhadh.2008.06.002 ↗
49. 10.1002/adfm.20231485310.1002/adfm.202314853 ↗
50. 10.1002/adma.20230206210.1002/adma.202302062 ↗
51. 10.1021/acsami.7b0998610.1021/acsami.7b09986 ↗
52. 10.1073/pnas.191156311610.1073/pnas.1911563116 ↗
53. 10.1002/adom.20240172910.1002/adom.202401729 ↗
54. 10.1021/bm900993n10.1021/bm900993n ↗
55. 10.1002/adsu.20200027210.1002/adsu.202000272 ↗
56. Ebnesajjad S. · 2010
57. 10.1039/C4RA03178D10.1039/C4RA03178D ↗
58. 10.1038/s41598-020-65171-110.1038/s41598-020-65171-1 ↗
59. 10.1021/acsbiomaterials.4c0071610.1021/acsbiomaterials.4c00716 ↗
60. EN13432 Certified Bioplastics Performance in Industrial Composting. 2000 10.1002/14651858.CD011736.10.1002/14651858.CD011736 ↗
61. 10.1063/5.006034410.1063/5.0060344 ↗