Assessing the influence of cotton fibers on the degradation in soil of a thermoplastic starch‐based biopolymer
Source abstract
Abstract
Abstract Biocomposites consisting of cotton fibers and a commercial starch‐based thermoplastic were subjected to accelerated soil burial test. Fourier transform infrared (FTIR) spectrometry analysis was carried out to provide chemical–structural information of the polymeric matrix and its reinforced biocomposites. The effects that take place as a consequence of the degradation in soil of both materials were studied by FTIR‐ATR, differential scanning calorimetry (DSC), scanning electron microscopy (SEM), and thermogravimetric analysis (TGA). When the polymeric matrix and the reinforced biocomposite are submitted to soil burial test, the infrared studies display a decrease in the CO band associated to the ester group of the synthetic component as a consequence of its degradation. The crystalline index of both materials decreased as a function of the degradation process, where the crystalline structure of the reinforced biocomposite was the most affected. In accordance, the degraded reinforced biocomposite micrographs displayed a more damaged morphology and fracture surface than the degraded polymeric matrix micrographs. On the other hand, the same thermal decomposition regions were assessed for both materials, regardless of the degradation time. Kissinger, Criado, and Coats‐Redfern methods were applied to analyze the thermogravimetric results. The kinetic triplet of each thermal decomposition process was determined for monitoring the degradation test. The thermal study confirms that starch was the most biodegradable polymeric matrix component in soil. However, the presence of cotton fiber modified the degradation rate of both matrix components; the degradability in soil of the synthetic component was slightly enhanced, whereas the biodegradation rate of the starch slowed down as a function of the soil exposure time. POLYM. COMPOS., 31:2102–2111, 2010. © 2010 Society of Plastics Engineers
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: biodegradable polymer synthesis and properties · Microplastics and Plastic Pollution · Natural Fiber Reinforced Composites
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
References (47)
Show source-provided references
1. 10.1023/A:102106830416910.1023/A:1021068304169 ↗
2. 10.1002/jsfa.255810.1002/jsfa.2558 ↗
3. 10.1201/978020350820610.1201/9780203508206 ↗
4. Mohanty A.K. · Macromol. Mater. Eng. · 2000 · 1 · 276
5. Imam S.H. · Appl. Environ. Microbiol. · 1990 · 56 · 131710.1128/aem.56.5.1317-1322.1990 ↗
6. 10.1002/app.2817110.1002/app.28171 ↗
7. 10.1002/app.2666710.1002/app.26667 ↗
8. 10.1002/masy.20085121310.1002/masy.200851213 ↗
9. 10.1002/app.1094110.1002/app.10941 ↗
10. Bastioli C. · J. Envir. Poly. Degrad. · 1995 · 3 · 2
11. 10.1016/S0141-3910(00)00102-610.1016/S0141-3910(00)00102-6 ↗
12. 10.1002/app.2427910.1002/app.24279 ↗
13. 10.1016/j.polymertesting.2005.03.01410.1016/j.polymertesting.2005.03.014 ↗
14. C.Schönweitz Consolidated progress report for EU FAIR CT98–3919 European Commission Directorate General XII‐E. 22001; SDME 8/26.
15. 10.1007/s10924-004-1215-610.1007/s10924-004-1215-6 ↗
16. 10.1016/j.polymdegradstab.2004.02.00910.1016/j.polymdegradstab.2004.02.009 ↗
17. 10.1016/j.polymdegradstab.2006.07.01110.1016/j.polymdegradstab.2006.07.011 ↗
18. 10.1177/089270570707838210.1177/0892705707078382 ↗
19. Moriana R. · J. Appl. Polym. Sci.
20. 10.1016/j.compositesa.2007.12.00210.1016/j.compositesa.2007.12.002 ↗
21. 10.1016/j.polymdegradstab.2009.04.02810.1016/j.polymdegradstab.2009.04.028 ↗
22. DIN 53739 Testing of plastics. Influence of Fungi and Bacteria. Visual Evaluation. Change in Mass and Physical Properties Nov.1984.
23. 10.1016/j.polymdegradstab.2006.08.02110.1016/j.polymdegradstab.2006.08.021 ↗
24. Socrates G. · 2001
25. 10.1016/j.carres.2004.01.01610.1016/j.carres.2004.01.016 ↗
26. 10.1002/pen.1138410.1002/pen.11384 ↗
27. 10.1002/app.1991.07042100710.1002/app.1991.070421007 ↗
28. 10.1016/j.foodchem.2007.07.00210.1016/j.foodchem.2007.07.002 ↗
29. 10.1002/mame.20060044510.1002/mame.200600445 ↗
30. 10.1016/S0040-6031(02)00523-310.1016/S0040-6031(02)00523-3 ↗
31. 10.1016/j.jfoodeng.2005.09.02810.1016/j.jfoodeng.2005.09.028 ↗
32. 10.1016/S0008-6215(00)86160-110.1016/S0008-6215(00)86160-1 ↗
33. 10.1016/S0008-6215(00)82690-710.1016/S0008-6215(00)82690-7 ↗
34. 10.1016/S0008-6215(00)82075-310.1016/S0008-6215(00)82075-3 ↗
35. 10.1023/A:102280622215810.1023/A:1022806222158 ↗
36. 10.1016/S0141-3910(97)00156-010.1016/S0141-3910(97)00156-0 ↗
37. Bastioli C. · 2005
38. 10.1016/j.jaap.2007.01.01310.1016/j.jaap.2007.01.013 ↗
39. 10.1007/BF0197954510.1007/BF01979545 ↗
40. 10.1016/j.polymdegradstab.2008.03.03110.1016/j.polymdegradstab.2008.03.031 ↗
41. Mohanty A.K. · Biofibres. Macromol. Mater. Eng. · 2000 · 1 · 276
42. 10.6028/jres.057.02610.6028/jres.057.026 ↗
43. Friedman H.L. · J. Appl. Polym. Sci. · 1964 · 6 · 183
44. 10.1246/bcsj.38.188110.1246/bcsj.38.1881 ↗
45. 10.1016/0040-6031(78)85151-X10.1016/0040-6031(78)85151-X ↗
46. 10.1038/201068a010.1038/201068a0 ↗
47. 10.1002/pat.39010.1002/pat.390 ↗