Next Article in Journal
Behavior of KCNQ Channels in Neural Plasticity and Motor Disorders
Next Article in Special Issue
Analysis and Experimental Study on Water Vapor Partial Pressure in the Membrane Distillation Process
Previous Article in Journal
The Growth of Metal–Organic Frameworks in the Presence of Graphene Oxide: A Mini Review
Previous Article in Special Issue
Research Progress of Polyvinyl Alcohol Water-Resistant Film Materials
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Membranes
Volume 12
Issue 5
10.3390/membranes12050500
membranes-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Review

Progress in the Degradability of Biodegradable Film Materials for Packaging

by
Chuanyan Guo
and
Hongge Guo
*
School of Light Industry Science and Engineering, Qilu University of Technology, Jinan 250353, China
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Membranes 2022, 12(5), 500; https://doi.org/10.3390/membranes12050500
Submission received: 19 April 2022 / Revised: 28 April 2022 / Accepted: 3 May 2022 / Published: 6 May 2022
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Theoretical and Experimental Investigation of the Mass and Heat Transfers in Membrane Separation Processes)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
In today’s world, the problem of “white pollution” is becoming more and more serious, and many countries have paid special attention to this problem, and it has become one of the most important tasks to reduce polymer waste and to protect the environment. Due to the degradability, safety, economy and practicality of biodegradable packaging film materials, biodegradable packaging film materials have become a major trend in the packaging industry to replace traditional packaging film materials, provided that the packaging performance requirements are met. This paper reviews the degradation mechanisms and performance characteristics of biodegradable packaging film materials, such as photodegradation, hydrodegradation, thermo-oxidative degradation and biodegradation, focuses on the research progress of the modification of biodegradable packaging film materials, and summarizes some challenges and bottlenecks of current biodegradable packaging film materials.

1. Introduction

Plastic was once hailed as one of the greatest inventions of the 20th century, because of its light weight, good processing performance, low price and many other advantages that make the global plastic industry has been rapid development [1]. According to statistics, the total global production of plastic products exceeds 300 million tons [2,3,4], with 13 million tons entering the water [5]. However, only 6–26% of plastic products are recycled, which means that at least 74% of plastic waste ends up in landfills or enters the environment every year [3,6], of which about 46% comes from the packaging industry, especially food packaging films, which are largely non-recyclable [7]. Since most plastics are now made from non-biodegradable materials, it often takes one to two hundred years to degrade these plastic products [8,9,10,11,12,13].
Plastic is the most commonly used packaging material [14,15], especially packaging film material. However, the packaging industry generates about 141 million tons of plastic waste each year [16], and most of the packaging film materials are composed of non-degradable materials, which obviously leads to many environmental problems, such as “white pollution” [17,18,19]. General purpose plastic packaging films such as polyethylene (PE), polypropylene (PP), polystyrene (PS) and polyvinyl chloride (PVC) [20,21] film materials undergo a long period of aging under the current common waste disposal method of sanitary landfill conditions. Under the action of abiotic factors (such as solar radiation, high temperature, wave impact, gravel abrasion) or biotic factors (such as ingestion, colonization, degradation) [22,23], physical or chemical property changes, molecular weight reduction and molecular weight distribution changes, but its decomposition is not complete, the majority of decomposition into microplastics (particle size < 5 mm) or nanosized-plastics (particle size < 0.1 μm) [24,25]. At present, microplastics have been widely detected in oceans [24,26], sediments [27], rivers [28,29,30], lakes [20], atmosphere [31,32,33], soil [34,35] and organisms [36], disrupting the normal metabolism and energy balance in organisms, thus affecting the normal growth and reproduction of organisms and causing potential harm to human health [37,38].
To solve these problems, it has become important for biodegradable packaging film materials to replace traditional packaging film materials [39,40]. However, biodegradable plastics currently account for less than 1% of total plastics production [41]. Compared with traditional packaging film materials, biodegradable packaging film materials are more expensive to produce and have poor mechanical properties and their barrier properties, which are the main reasons for their limited applications [42].
This paper reviewed the degradation mechanism of different packaging films and the research progress of biodegradable films, and provided outlook on the future development trend of packaging film materials.

2. Degradation Mechanism of Degradable Packaging Film Materials

Degraded plastics are plastics that have been subjected to defined environmental conditions for a period of time and contain one or more steps that result in significant changes in the chemical structure of the material resulting in loss of certain properties (such as integrity, molecular mass, structure or mechanical strength) and/or fragmentation [43,44]. As shown in Table 1, the degradation degree can be divided into complete and incomplete degradation, and different degradation mechanisms can be divided into photodegradation, water degradation, thermal oxidative degradation and biodegradation [45].

2.1. Photodegradation

Photodegradable materials are degraded to low molecular weight compounds that are relatively safe for the environment by photo-initiated fracture and free radical oxidative fracture reactions under the action of sunlight (mainly UV light) [46]. Photodegradable film materials can be mainly divided into photodegradable materials obtained by copolymerization and photodegradable materials with composite photosensitizers [47].
In sunlight, UV light with a wavelength of 290 nm–400 nm only accounts for about 5%, and it is the UV light that causes photodegradation of the film. Figure 1 shows the photodegradation mechanism. The molecular chains react under certain conditions of oxygen, temperature and humidity, and the long molecular chains are decomposed into peroxides and eventually achieve photodegradation [48].
Christensen et al. [49] investigated the photodegradation properties of polymers with a 1:1 mass ratio of polycaprolactone to polyvinyl chloride by monitoring CO2 emissions during UV exposure. The results showed that the interaction of the two components in the polymer reduced the photodegradability. Najaf et al. [50] used polyaniline modified TiO2 as a photocatalyst and then combined it with polyvinyl chloride to make photodegradable films. The results showed that the quality of polyaniline decreased by 67% when the molar ratio of polyaniline to TiO2 was 10:1 under the condition of 30W UV lamp irradiation for 720 h, decreased by 12% compared with the pure polyvinyl chloride (PVC) film, and its photodegradation performance was greatly improved.
Photodegradable materials must be exposed to light and have a long degradation period, while most film materials are not exposed to natural light for a long time after disposal and it is difficult to ensure the degradation conditions required for photodegradable film materials, which greatly limits the large-scale application of photodegradable film materials.

2.2. Hydrodegradation

Hydrodegradable plastic is a kind of plastic that can self-degrade by hydrolysis. The essence is the presence of hydrolyzable covalent bonds in degradable plastics, such as esters, ethers, anhydrides, amides, carbamides or ester-amide groups [45], which can achieve dissolution when the plastic encounters water [51,52]. Water activity, temperature, pH and time are the key factors affecting the efficiency of hydrolysis [53].
Polyvinyl alcohol (PVA) is a water-soluble polymer with a carbon chain as the main chain and a large number of hydroxyl groups on the side chain [54,55]. It is non-toxic, easily processed, biodegradable, has good mechanical properties [56,57], and can be mixed with natural polymeric materials such as polysaccharides and proteins to improve its properties [58,59,60]. Mainly used in the packaging of water-soluble products, the buyer can do not touch the product in the process of using the product, safe and at the same time make the use of the product more convenient. However, the resistance of PVA film to water is very low, usually in a very short period of time can be completely dissolved [61]; therefore, if it is widely used in the field of packaging needs, it needs to be modified for water resistance.
Lv et al. [62] investigated the time-dependent hydrolysis behavior of polylactic acid (PLA) and starch/PLA composites. The results showed that the presence of starch may induce hydrolysis to occur at the interface between starch and PLA. In addition, starch can slightly slow down PLA hydrolysis without affecting the degree of PLA hydrolysis. Table 2 shows the water degradation of several common biodegradable polyesters in different water environments.
Table
Table 2. Hydrologic degradation of several typical biodegradable polyesters in different water environments. Data from [63].
Table 2. Hydrologic degradation of several typical biodegradable polyesters in different water environments. Data from [63].
MaterialConditionsWeight Loss %Number-Average Molecular Weight (Mn)Mechanical Properties
Polylactic acid (PLA)Seawater<296.60 × 103 to 83.85 × 103No significant change
Germicidal water<296.60 × 103 to 67.98 × 103
Poly (butyleneadipate-co-terephthalate) (PBAT)Seawater<246.67 × 103 to 20.31 × 103Total loss
Germicidal water<246.67 × 103 to 16.02 × 103
Poly (butylene succinate) (PBS)Seawater<241.56 × 103 to 30.11 × 103Total loss
Germicidal water<241.56 × 103 to 18.63 × 103
Polycaprolactone (PCL)Seawater3277.79 × 103 to 77.09 × 103Total loss
Germicidal water<277.79 × 103 to 14.82 × 103

2.3. Thermal Oxidative Degradation

Thermally oxygen degraded plastic is that subjected to heat and/or oxidation over a period of time and contains one or more steps that result in significant changes in the chemical structure of the material, resulting in loss of certain properties (such as integrity, molecular mass, structure or mechanical strength) and/or fragmentation [64,65]. Heat can change the oxidation mechanism of plastics, and higher temperatures can improve the degradation of plastics [66,67]. Figure 2 shows the mechanism of thermal oxidative degradation. Thermally oxygen degraded plastic is also very difficult to degrade completely in most cases due to the conditions.
Membranes 12 00500 g002 550
Figure 2. Auto-oxidation scheme of polymer. Reprinted from Ref. [68]. Copyright (2016), with permission from Elsevier.
Figure 2. Auto-oxidation scheme of polymer. Reprinted from Ref. [68]. Copyright (2016), with permission from Elsevier.
Membranes 12 00500 g002
Gaurav et al. [69] prepared two high-density polyethylene/polylactic acid blends with and without the addition of a compatibilizer and a pro-oxidant using a melt blending technique. The results showed that the addition of the compatibilizer led to a significant improvement in the mechanical properties of the blends and the addition of the pro-oxidant led to an improvement in their oxidative degradation properties.

2.4. Biodegradable

Biodegradable plastics are those degraded by naturally occurring microorganisms under natural conditions such as soil and/or sand, and/or specific conditions such as composting or anaerobic digestion or aqueous cultures, and ultimately degrade to environmentally benign biomass, CO2, CH4 and H2O [70,71,72]. Figure 3 shows the biodegradation mechanism. Biodegradable plastics have stable performance and can be completely degraded and returned to nature in a short period of time under composting conditions [73].
Current research shows that animals, plants, microorganisms and enzymes all have some ability to degrade plastics [74,75]. Table 3 shows the biodegradation of common plastics. Among the many ways to change the properties of plastics, biodegradation of plastics is one of the inevitable environmental processes for plastics to enter the environment, and it is also an in situ, green, relatively low-cost and low-technology way to treat plastic waste.
Table
Table 3. Biodegradation of common plastics.
Table 3. Biodegradation of common plastics.
MaterialConditionsThe Result of DegradationReferences
PolyethyleneDegradation of high-density polyethylene with Aspergillus flavus PEDX3 strain for 28 daysMolecular weight reduction[76]
PolypropyleneDegradation of polypropylene with microalgae Spirulina sp. for 112 daysDecrease in mechanical strength and relative molecular weight[77]
PolystyreneDegradation of polystyrene with Achatina fulica for 4 weeksThe mass loss was 30.7% on average, forming a functional group of oxidation intermediates[78]
Polyethylene terephthalateDegradation of polyethylene terephthalate with microalgae Spirulina sp. for 112 daysDecrease in mechanical strength[77]
Polylactic acidDegradation in accordance with ISO 1755615% of Polylactic acid is degraded[79]
Among various degradable mechanisms, biodegradation is more complete and faster than other degradation mechanisms, and the degradation products are harmless. Biodegradable plastics can be composted together with organic waste, thus eliminating the manual sorting step compared to general plastic waste, greatly facilitating waste collection and disposal, thus making composting and harmless disposal of organic waste into reality [80]. Biodegradable packaging film materials are green, environment-friendly and resource-saving compared with traditional film materials, thus gradually becoming a research hotspot in the packaging industry, the development of biodegradable packaging film is an effective way to fundamentally solve “white pollution”.

3. Biodegradable Film Materials

Biodegradable film materials can be divided into three categories according to raw materials and processing methods: natural polymer-based films, petroleum-based film materials and bio-based film materials.

3.1. Natural Polymer-Based Films

3.1.1. Starch-Based Film Materials

Starch is a natural degradable polymer [81], available from a wide range of plant species [82], the long chain molecules can be broken into glucose monosaccharides and other small molecules by the action of microorganisms, and eventually metabolized to CO2 and H2O [83]. Starch-based films are one of the most productive biodegradable films in the world, with high flexibility, good oxygen barrier, colorless, environmentally friendly and other characteristics [84], but its film also has a difficult to process, physical properties and poor water resistance as well as other disadvantages [85], so in practical use, they usually need to be modified [86]. Surface modification [87,88], blending with reinforcement fillers [89,90,91], and blending with other polymers [92,93] are the three most commonly applied reinforcement strategies. Table 4 shows the different modifications of starch-based film materials.
Table
Table 4. The different modifications of starch-based film materials.
Table 4. The different modifications of starch-based film materials.
ModificationConditionsResultReferences
Blending with other polymersModified starch-based film materials with natural fibers in blendsTensile strength and modulus of elasticity were improved, but the elongation at break was not as good as that of ordinary starch-based films[92]
Blending with other polymersModified barley hulls (BH) by grafting palmitic acid and then blended with cross-linked polyvinyl alcohol (PVA)/starchThe physical properties of the composite film could be effectively improved, and the air and water resistance were substantially enhanced[93]
Surface modificationAcetylated corn starch (AS), acetylated sugarcane fiber (AcSF) and glycerol were used to make biodegradable film materialsMechanical properties and water resistance have been improved[87]
Blending with reinforcement fillersDifferent contents of metakaolin were blended with cassava starch to make film materialsThe mechanical tensile strength and properties increased significantly and the elongation at break decreased[91]

3.1.2. Cellulose-Based Film Materials

Cellulose is a highly reactive biopolymer with a large amount of hydroxyl group in its structure [94,95,96,97], which can be chemically modified through various reactions such as esterification, etherification and oxidation to give cellulose new properties while ensuring its degradable properties [98,99]. As a packaging material, cellulose also has good biodegradability and excellent physical and mechanical properties, which makes it one of the most suitable natural polymers for use in films [98,100]. However, cellulose also has some limitations, such as high water absorption and poor interfacial adhesion [101]. Cellulose is also converted into various derivatives, which can be mainly classified as: cellulose acetate (CA), cellulose sulfate (CS), cellulose nitrate (CN), carboxymethyl cellulose (CMC), ethyl cellulose (EC), methyl cellulose (MC), cellulose nanocrystals (CNC) and nanocellulose (NC) [98]. Table 5 shows examples of cellulose derivatives film formation.
Table
Table 5. Examples of cellulose derivatives film formation.
Table 5. Examples of cellulose derivatives film formation.
MaterialConditionsThe Result of DegradationReferences
Cellulose acetate (CA)The film material was produced by mixing CA, sodium alginate (SA) and carrageenan (CG) by solution casting methodThe tensile strength, thermal stability and antimicrobial activity of the films were improved[102]
Nanocellulose (NC)Nanocellulose is used as filler for melt blending and blown film with PLAThe mechanical strength, crystallinity and wettability are improved[103]
Cellulose nanocrystals (CNC)/ Carboxymethyl cellulose (CMC)CMC films containing various contents of CNC were prepared by solution casting methodCompared with pure CMC films, CMC/CNC composite films have better UV barrier, mechanical strength, water vapor barrier and thermal stability[104]
Ethyl cellulose (EC)Preparation of PVA/EC/tea polyphenol (TP) nanofiber films by blending electrospinning techniqueThe thermal stability, surface hydrophobicity, water resistance, water vapor barrier capacity and tensile properties of the composite nanofiber films were improved[105]

3.1.3. Chitosan-Based Film Materials

As the second most abundant polysaccharide in nature after cellulose [106,107], chitosan (CS) is not only widely available and biodegradable, but also has good film-forming, biocompatible and antibacterial properties [108,109], and is one of the ideal materials for packaging films. However, its poor mechanical properties, weak water resistance and poor thermal stability also limit the application in packaging [110,111]. Properties can be improved by cross-linking [112,113], graft copolymerization [114,115], blending with reinforcement fillers [116] and blending with other polymers [117]. Table 6 shows the different modifications of chitosan-based film materials.
Table
Table 6. The different modifications of Chitosan-based film materials.
Table 6. The different modifications of Chitosan-based film materials.
Modification ConditionsResultReferences
Cross-linkingPreparation of a chitosan/bacterial cellulose membrane treated by multiple cross-linking methodsMechanical strength and elongation at break increase, but its antimicrobial efficiency decreases[112]
Graft copolymerizationChitosan (CS) was grafted with caffeic acid (CA-g-CS) through carbodiimide coupling and cast into filmsCA-g-CS films have higher tensile strength, elongation at break and oxidation activity, and better barrier properties to water vapor and oxygen[114]
Blending with reinforcement fillersNickel oxide nanoparticles (NiONPs) were doped into chitosan-based films to fabricate composite filmsThe composite film has improved water resistance, tensile strength, thermal properties and surface hydrophobicity, and has ideal photocatalytic and antibacterial activity[116]
Blending with other polymersBiodegradable chitosan-based film containing micro ramie fiber and lignin was prepared by the casting methodSignificant improvement in mechanical, water resistance, thermal and oxidation resistance properties[117]

3.2. Petroleum-Based Film Materials

3.2.1. Poly (Butylene Succinate) Film Materials

Poly (butylene succinate) (PBS or PBSu), an aliphatic polyester, can be contained in petrochemical-based biodegradable polymers [118,119], but the important novelty is that PBS can be produced from renewable resources such as sugarcane, cassava and corn [120,121]. PBS has similar properties to PE, so it is often compared to PE and appears as a biodegradable alternative [122]. PBS has excellent properties, such as elongation at break of over 200% and good barrier properties [7,123]. However, the relatively high cost still limits its application. Therefore, many strategies are being developed to reduce costs, on the one hand, and improve its performance to meet the specific requirements of packaging, on the other. Blending with other polymers [124,125,126,127], synthetic copolymers [128,129] and blending with reinforcement fillers [130,131] are commonly used to improve their properties. Table 7 shows the different modifications of PBS film materials.
Table
Table 7. The different modifications of PBS film materials.
Table 7. The different modifications of PBS film materials.
Modification ConditionsResultReferences
Blending with other polymersThe PBS and plasticized whey protein (PWP) blend makes the filmSignificant increase in modulus of elasticity, tensile strength and elongation at break[124]
Blending with other polymersPreparation of PCL/PBS co-blended film by immersion precipitationImproved hydrophilicity and biodegradability, in addition to higher pollution inhibition index[127]
Synthetic copolymersSynthetic poly (butylene succinate-co-diethylene glycol succinate) (P(BS-co-DEGS)) copolymerCrystallinity, tensile modulus, thermal stability slightly reduced and water degradation rate increased.[129]
Blending with reinforcement fillersPreparation of PBS/graphene nanoplatelets (GnP) nanocompositesImproved barrier properties to water and oxygen[131]

3.2.2. Poly (Butyleneadipate-co-Terephthalate) Film Materials

Poly (butyleneadipate-co-terephthalate) (PBAT) is an aliphatic-aromatic copolyester mainly made by condensation of benzodimethyl (C8H6O4), adipic acid (C6H10O4) and butylene glycol (C4H10O2), etc. [132,133,134]. In addition to biodegradability, PBAT has high flexibility, high strength and good tear resistance, and is widely used in various industries, especially in food packaging [135,136]. Pure PBAT films have higher costs and lower mechanical properties than traditional film materials [133,137,138], so blending with reinforcement fillers [139,140,141,142] or blending with other polymers [134,143] is an effective way to reduce prices and improve performance. Table 8 shows the different modifications of PBAT film materials.
Table
Table 8. The different modifications of PBAT film materials.
Table 8. The different modifications of PBAT film materials.
Modification ConditionsResultReferences
Blending with reinforcement fillersStarch/PBAT nanocomposite films with high starch content were prepared by extrusion blow moldingSignificant increase in mechanical strength, flexibility and hydrophobicity[141]
Blending with reinforcement fillersPreparation of PBAT/lignin composite films by extrusion hot-pressingSignificantly improved flexibility and mechanical properties[140]
Blending with other polymersCompression molded biodegradable films based on PBS and PBAT at varying weights were preparedElongation at break increased with increasing PBAT content, and gas barrier properties decreased with increasing PBS content.[143]
Blending with reinforcement fillersPreparation of PBAT/TiO2 biodegradable filmsThe addition of TiO2 leads to the improvement of the overall barrier properties, thermal stability and tensile strength of PBAT composite film materials, but its elongation at break decreases[142]

3.2.3. Polycaprolactone Film Materials

Polycaprolactone (PCL) is a green, non-toxic synthetic aliphatic polyester material [144] with numerous advantages, including: (1) faster crystallization rate and higher crystallization [145]; (2) rubbery state at room temperature, elongation at break hundreds of times higher than PLA [146,147]; (3) better rheology, viscoelasticity, good flexibility and processability [148]; (4) outstanding resistance to UV radiation, wear resistance, anti-aging properties, longer degradation half-life than PLA [127,149]; (5) excellent biocompatible and biodegradable, non-toxic and harmless, EU and FDA certified for implantation into human body [150]; (6) strong hydrophobicity and drug passage [151]. However, it has the characteristics of poor water solubility, slow degradation, low melting point and poor mechanical strength, so it needs to be modified in the actual use process. Table 9 shows the different modifications of PCL film materials.
Table
Table 9. The different modifications of PCL film materials.
Table 9. The different modifications of PCL film materials.
Modification ConditionsResultReferences
Cross-linkingPolycaprolactone (PCL) was cross-linked by adding different amounts of organic peroxides, such as di-(2-tert-butylperoxyisopropyl)-benzene (BIB)PCL branching and cross-linking have significant effects on the mechanical properties of PCL 0.5 pbw (part by weight) BIB-modified PCL has better mechanical properties, and higher BIB content can lead to degradation and excessive cross-linking of PCL[152]
Compound modificationPrepared PCL/polyvinyl chloride (PVC)/organoclay nanobioblends filmEnhanced mechanical and barrier properties, exhibiting some antibacterial activity[153]
Blending with other polymersPCL/PLA is mixed and green tea extract (GTE) is used as an antioxidant to make the filmReduced hydrophilicity and enhanced barrier and mechanical properties[154]

3.3. Bio-Based Film Materials

3.3.1. Polyhydroxyalkanoates Film Materials

Polyhydroxyalkanoate (PHA) is a general term for a class of biopolyester produced by microbial fermentation engineering technology, which has good biocompatibility and biodegradability [155,156], and has the thermoplastic processability of petrochemical resins, which can be processed by injection molding, extrusion blow molding film, extrusion calendering, extrusion hollow molding, compression molding, etc., and manufactured into films and containers that are widely used in packaging [157,158]. PHAs are classified into short chain length and medium chain length PHAs, which depend on the amount of carbon in the monomeric fraction [159,160]. Its main varieties are poly-β-hydroxybutyric acid (PHB), poly-β-hydroxyvalerate (PHV) and their copolymers poly (β-hydroxybutyrate-β-hydroxyvalerate) (PHBV), etc. [161]. Besides having some advantages, it is limited by poor mechanical properties, high susceptibility to thermal degradation and high production cost in practical applications [162], so it needs to be modified. Table 10 shows the different modifications of PHA film materials.
Table
Table 10. The different modifications of PHA film materials.
Table 10. The different modifications of PHA film materials.
Modification ConditionsResultReferences
Copolymerization modificationFour cross-linkers (citric acid, adipic acid, borax and boric acid) with polycarboxyl or polyhydroxy structures were used in the preparation of the starch/polyhydroxyalkanoate (PHA) filmsWith higher relative crystallinity, but hinders the formation of intercalation structures in the polymer matrix, improving light transmission and barrier properties[163]
Blending with reinforcement fillersLignin nanoparticles homogeneously dispersed in poly-β-hydroxybutyric acid (PHB) matrix to form nanocomposites with improved properties using oil-in-water emulsion methodImproved mechanical properties, lower crystallinity, higher glass transition temperature and better barrier properties[164]
Compound modificationPreparation of PHA/PLA nanocomposite films under different levels of montmorilloniteBetter thermal stability and electrical conductivity[165]

3.3.2. Polylactic Acid Film Materials

Polylactic acid (PLA) is a type of degradable polymer material with lactic acid as raw material [166,167], which is renewable and has the characteristics of non-toxicity, non-irritation, good biocompatibility, processability, excellent mechanical properties, complete biodegradability and environmental friendliness [168,169], and is considered as the main alternative to petroleum-based plastics [170].
The degradation of PLA in nature occurs first by water degradation and then by biodegradation, and the hydrolysis of PLA films is mainly caused by the hydrolysis of the ester bond of the main chain into molecules of low relative molecular mass [171,172,173,174], and the hydrolysis process is shown in Figure 4 [175].
Membranes 12 00500 g004 550
Figure 4. Hydrolysis mechanism of PLA. Reprinted from Ref. [175]. Copyright (2016), with permission from Springer.
Figure 4. Hydrolysis mechanism of PLA. Reprinted from Ref. [175]. Copyright (2016), with permission from Springer.
Membranes 12 00500 g004
The biodegradation of PLA is greatly influenced by environmental factors [176]. The start of hydrolysis at room temperature takes six months, while biodegradation takes one year, and microorganisms play almost no role in the beginning of hydrolysis, which is one of the characteristics of PLA [176,177].
PLA is one of several biodegradable plastics with large global production, PLA has sufficient raw material sources, is renewable and has good hardness, gloss and thermoplasticity, as well as good tensile strength and processing properties, but it also has deficiencies such as poor blending properties and expensive [178]. Currently, the comprehensive performance of PLA is mainly improved by copolymerization modification, blending with reinforcement fillers, blending with other polymers and compound modification [179,180,181]. Table 11 shows the different modifications of PLA film materials.
Table
Table 11. The different modifications of PLA film materials.
Table 11. The different modifications of PLA film materials.
Modification ConditionsResultReferences
Blending with reinforcement fillersAdd bamboo cellulose nanowhiskers (BCNW) to PLA as a filler and make a film by solution casting methodMechanical properties, glass transition temperature, cold crystallinity increase and microcrystal size increase significantly[180]
Compound modificationIntroduction of glass fibers (GF) modified with silane coupling agent (GF-S) into PLA to make PLA-based compositesImproved mechanical and thermodynamic properties[179]
Blending with reinforcement fillersHalloysite nanotubes (HNT) and chitosan as fillers were blended with PLA to make filmsMechanical strength and mechanical properties have been improved, with excellent barrier to water and UV light, and some antibacterial ability[166]
Blending with other polymersCinnamic acid (CA)/PLA films obtained by casting or thermal processingGreatly improves the mechanical properties of the film and improves the barrier to oxygen and water[182]
copolymerization modificationPLA is blended with polydecalactone (PDL)-grafted cellulose copolymer (CgPD) and made into filmsImproved mechanical properties and mechanical properties[183]
PLA film is the most cost-effective biodegradable film material. Its mechanical properties and transparency are similar to those of polystyrene (PS) or polyethylene terephthalate (PET) films, and it has good processability and stable performance, making it a promising biodegradable film. Compared with other materials, there are many PLA materials that are already used in business. R. J. Reynolds Tobacco Products (US) has developed a new tobacco packaging film coated with a metal oxide layer consisting of aluminum oxide, titanium oxide and/or aluminum-titanium oxide that retains some moisture barrier capability at the fold after folding [184]. Suzhou Xinghuo Fengying Environment Prot Package Co Ltd. has developed a blown film process using PLA, PBAT, antioxidants and poly (N-propionylethylenimine) blended extrusion, according to which the garbage bags produced by this process have high elongation at break [185]. Perak Biochemicals has developed a method for producing polylactic acid (PLA)-shaped products by thermoforming and such thermoformed PLA products. Purac Biochem Bv (NL) Perak Biochemicals has developed a method for producing polylactic acid (PLA)-shaped products by thermoforming and such thermoformed PLA products [186].

4. Summary and Outlook

This review focuses on the degradation mechanism of packaging films and the properties and performance of several common biodegradable film materials available today. This includes natural polymer-based film materials, petroleum-based film materials and bio-based film materials. With the global “plastic ban”, the development of biodegradable packaging films is one of the important research directions to solve the resource and environmental problems. However, biodegradable packaging films also have poorer performance than traditional packaging films, insufficient degradation controllability and higher production costs. How to reduce the material production cost by improving the synthesis and process is an urgent issue for the massive use of biodegradable films. In response to the disadvantages of poor performance of biodegradable films, the development of modification technologies such as cross-linking modification, hybrid modification, copolymer modification and composite modification has become one of the key research directions at present. The degradation performance of biodegradable packaging film is also an important factor affecting its use, and either too fast or too slow degradation will limit its use. To master the degradation mechanism of biodegradable packaging films and then realize the controlled degradation of packaging films is a challenge that needs to be overcome by the efforts of researchers.
At present, the misuse of biodegradable film materials in the market places a great burden on the environment. Since they are expensive, some manufacturers usually add some petroleum-based plastics to biodegradable products to improve durability as well as reduce cost. However, this can lead to “pseudo-degradation” and can result in microplastics entering the environment, causing a greater burden on the environment. Therefore, developing biodegradable standards for the packaging industry will also be a priority. The global outbreak of the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) in 2019 has gradually started to bring antibacterial and antiviral packaging films into the limelight, and food safety issues have become too important to ignore, and the development of antibacterial and antiviral biodegradable packaging films will be an important research direction. Research and development of biodegradable packaging films with better performance, economy and convenience is the main task of the packaging industry all over the world, replacing traditional packaging films with biodegradable packaging films to achieve green development in the packaging field.

Author Contributions

C.G.: resources, writing—original draft, investigation software, visualization. H.G.: conceptualization, supervision. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was funded by the Qilu University of Technology (Shandong Academy of Sciences), grant number QLUTGJHZ2018028.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

Not applicable.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Geyer, R.; Jambeck, J.R.; Law, K.L. Production, Use, and Fate of All Plastics Ever Made. Sci. Adv. 2017, 3, e1700782. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  2. Lin, Z.; Jin, T.; Zou, T.; Xu, L.; Xi, B.; Xu, D.; He, J.; Xiong, L.; Tang, C.; Peng, J.; et al. Current Progress on Plastic/Microplastic Degradation: Fact Influences and Mechanism. Environ. Pollut. 2022, 304, 119159. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Ouyang, Z.; Li, S.; Zhao, M.; Wangmu, Q.; Ding, R.; Xiao, C.; Guo, X. The Aging Behavior of Polyvinyl Chloride Microplastics Promoted by UV-Activated Persulfate Process. J. Hazard. Mater. 2022, 424, 127461. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Paletta, A.; Filho, W.L.; Balogun, A.L.; Foschi, E.; Bonoli, A. Barriers and Challenges to Plastics Valorisation in the Context of a Circular Economy: Case Studies from Italy. J. Clean. Prod. 2019, 241, 118149. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Enfrin, M.; Dumée, L.F.; Lee, J. Nano/Microplastics in Water and Wastewater Treatment Processes—Origin, Impact and Potential Solutions. Water Res. 2019, 161, 621–638. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Alimi, O.S.; Farner Budarz, J.; Hernandez, L.M.; Tufenkji, N. Microplastics and Nanoplastics in Aquatic Environments: Aggregation, Deposition, and Enhanced Contaminant Transport. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2018, 52, 1704–1724. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Wu, F.; Misra, M.; Mohanty, A.K. Challenges and New Opportunities on Barrier Performance of Biodegradable Polymers for Sustainable Packaging. Prog. Polym. Sci. 2021, 117, 101395. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Andrady, A.L.; Pegram, J.E.; Nakatsuka, S. Studies on Enhanced Degradable Plastics: 1. The Geographic Variability in Outdoor Lifetimes of Enhanced Photodegradable Polyethylenes. J. Environ. Polym. Degrad. 1993, 1, 31–43. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Abu-Hilal, A.H.; Al-Najjar, T. Litter Pollution on the Jordanian Shores of the Gulf of Aqaba (Red Sea). Mar. Environ. Res. 2004, 58, 39–63. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Lohr, A.; Savelli, H.; Beunen, R.; Kalz, M.; Ragas, A.; Belleghem, F.V. Solutions for Global Marine Litter Pollution. Curr. Opin. Environ. Sustain. 2017, 28, 90–99. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  11. Bano, K.; Kuddus, M.; RZaheer, M.; Zia, Q.; FKhan, M.; Gupta, A.; Aliev, G. Microbial Enzymatic Degradation of Biodegradable Plastics. Curr. Pharm. Biotechnol. 2017, 18, 429–440. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Ward, C.P.; Armstrong, C.J.; Walsh, A.N.; Jackson, J.H.; Reddy, C.M. Sunlight Converts Polystyrene to Carbon Dioxide and Dissolved Organic Carbon. Environ. Sci. Technol. Lett. 2019, 6, 669–674. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Dharma, H.N.C.; Jaafar, J.; Widiastuti, N.; Matsuyama, H.; Rajabsadeh, S.; Othman, M.H.D.; Rahman, M.A.; Jafri, N.N.M.; Suhaimin, N.S.; Nasir, A.M.; et al. A Review of Titanium Dioxide (TiO2)-Based Photocatalyst for Oilfield-Produced Water Treatment. Membranes 2022, 12, 345. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Prabhakar, P.; Sen, R.K.; Mayandi, V.; Patel, M.; Swathi, B.; Vishwakarma, J.; Gowri, V.S.; Lakshminarayanan, R.; Mondal, D.P.; Srivastava, A.K.; et al. Mussel-Inspired Chemistry to Design Biodegradable Food Packaging Films with Antimicrobial Properties. Process Saf. Environ. Prot. 2022, 162, 17–29. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Jing, X.; Wen, H.; Gong, X.; Xu, Z.; Kajetanowicz, A. Recycling Waste Plastics Packaging to Value-Added Products by Two-Step Microwave Cracking with Different Heating Strategies. Fuel Process. Technol. 2020, 201, 106346. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Ncube, L.K.; Ude, A.U.; Ogunmuyiwa, E.N.; Zulkifli, R.; Beas, I.N. An Overview of Plasticwaste Generation and Management in Food Packaging Industries. Recycling 2021, 6, 12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Webb, H.K.; Arnott, J.; Crawford, R.J.; Ivanova, E.P. Plastic Degradation and Its Environmental Implications with Special Reference to Poly(Ethylene Terephthalate). Polymers 2013, 5, 1–18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  18. Rhim, J.-W.; Park, H.-M.; Ha, C.-S. Bio-Nanocomposites for Food Packaging Applications. Prog. Polym. Sci. 2013, 38, 1629–1652. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Al-Thawadi, S. Microplastics and Nanoplastics in Aquatic Environments: Challenges and Threats to Aquatic Organisms. Arab. J. Sci. Eng. 2020, 45, 4419–4440. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Mao, R.; Hu, Y.; Zhang, S.; Wu, R.; Guo, X. Microplastics in the Surface Water of Wuliangsuhai Lake, Northern China. Sci. Total Environ. 2020, 723, 137820. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Ngo, P.L.; Pramanik, B.K.; Shah, K.; Roychand, R. Pathway, Classification and Removal Efficiency of Microplastics in Wastewater Treatment Plants. Environ. Pollut. 2019, 255, 113326. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Galloway, T.S.; Cole, M.; Lewis, C. Interactions of Microplastic Debris throughout the Marine Ecosystem. Nat. Ecol. Evol. 2017, 1, 116. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Song, Y.K.; Hong, S.H.; Jang, M.; Han, G.M.; Jung, S.W.; Shim, W.J. Combined Effects of UV Exposure Duration and Mechanical Abrasion on Microplastic Fragmentation by Polymer Type. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2017, 51, 4368–4376. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Wang, S.; Chen, H.; Zhou, X.; Tian, Y.; Lin, H. Microplastic Abundance, Distribution and Composition in the Mid-West Pacific Ocean. Environ. Pollut. 2020, 264, 114125. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Zhang, L.; Xie, Y.; Zhong, S.; Liu, J.; Qin, Y.; Gao, P. Microplastics in Freshwater and Wild Fishes from Lijiang River in Guangxi, Southwest China. Sci. Total Environ. 2021, 755, 142428. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Cutroneo, L.; Reboa, A.; Besio, G.; Borgogno, F.; Canesi, L.; Canuto, S.; Dara, M.; Enrile, F.; Forioso, I.; Greco, G.; et al. Microplastics in Seawater: Sampling Strategies, Laboratory Methodologies, and Identification Techniques Applied to Port Environment. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2020, 27, 8938–8952. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Vaughan, R.; Turner, S.D.; Rose, N.L. Microplastics in the Sediments of a UK Urban Lake. Environ. Pollut. 2017, 229, 10–18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Tibbetts, J.; Krause, S.; Lynch, I.; Smith, G.H.S. Abundance, Distribution, and Drivers of Microplastic Contamination in Urban River Environments. Water Switz. 2018, 10, 1597. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  29. Ding, L.; Mao, R.F.; Guo, X.; Yang, X.; Zhang, Q.; Yang, C. Microplastics in Surface Waters and Sediments of the Wei River, in the Northwest of China. Sci. Total Environ. 2019, 667, 427–434. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Wang, G.; Lu, J.; Tong, Y.; Liu, Z.; Zhou, H.; Xiayihazi, N. Occurrence and Pollution Characteristics of Microplastics in Surface Water of the Manas River Basin, China. Sci. Total Environ. 2020, 710, 136099. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Wright, S.L.; Ulke, J.; Font, A.; Chan, K.; Kelly, F.J. Atmospheric Microplastic Deposition in an Urban Environment and an Evaluation of Transport. Environ. Int. 2019, 136, 105411. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Prata, J.C.; Castro, J.L.; da Costa, J.P.; Duarte, A.C.; Cerqueira, M.; Rocha-Santos, T. An Easy Method for Processing and Identification of Natural and Synthetic Microfibers and Microplastics in Indoor and Outdoor Air. MethodsX 2020, 7, 100762. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Zhang, Q.; Zhao, Y.; Du, F.; Cai, H.; Wang, G.; Shi, H. Microplastic Fallout in Different Indoor Environments. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2020, 54, 6530–6539. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Liu, M.; Lu, S.; Yang, S.; Lei, L.; Hu, J.; Lv, W.; Zhou, W.; Cao, C.; Shi, H.; Yang, X. Microplastic and Mesoplastic Pollution in Farmland Soils in Suburbs of Shanghai, China. Environ. Pollut. 2018, 242, 855–862. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Ding, L.; Zhang, S.; Wang, X.; Yang, X.; Guo, X. The Occurrence and Distribution Characteristics of Microplastics in the Agricultural Soils of Shaanxi Province, in North-Western China. Sci. Total Environ. 2020, 720, 137525. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Payton, T.G.; Beckingham, B.A.; Dustan, P. Microplastic Exposure to Zooplankton at Tidal Fronts in Charleston Harbor, SC USA. Estuar. Coast. Shelf Sci. 2019, 232, 106510. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Wang, F.; Wong, C.S.; Chen, D.; Lu, X.; Wang, F.; Zeng, E.Y. Interaction of Toxic Chemicals with Microplastics: A Critical Review. Water Res. 2018, 139, 208–219. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Zhang, Y.; Liao, A. The Impact of Microplastics on Human Health:A Review. J. Nanjing Univ. Sci. 2020, 56, 8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Lamberti, F.M.; Román-Ramírez, L.A.; Wood, J. Recycling of Bioplastics: Routes and Benefits. J. Polym. Environ. 2020, 28, 2551–2571. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Panchal, S.S.; Vasava, D.V. Biodegradable Polymeric Materials: Synthetic Approach. ACS Omega 2020, 5, 4370–4379. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Niaounakis, M. Recycling of Biopolymers—The Patent Perspective. Eur. Polym. J. 2019, 114, 464–475. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Dilkes-Hoffman, L.S.; Pratt, S.; Lant, P.A.; Laycock, B. 19—The Role of Biodegradable Plastic in Solving Plastic Solid Waste Accumulation. In Plastics to Energy; Al-Salem, S.M., Ed.; Plastics Design Library; William Andrew Publishing: Norwich, NY, USA, 2019; pp. 469–505. ISBN 978-0-12-813140-4. [Google Scholar]
  43. Qin, Z.-H.; Mou, J.-H.; Chao, C.Y.H.; Chopra, S.S.; Daoud, W.; Leu, S.; Ning, Z.; Tso, C.Y.; Chan, C.K.; Tang, S.; et al. Biotechnology of Plastic Waste Degradation, Recycling, and Valorization: Current Advances and Future Perspectives. ChemSusChem 2021, 14, 4103–4114. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  44. Zaaba, N.F.; Jaafar, M. A Review on Degradation Mechanisms of Polylactic Acid: Hydrolytic, Photodegradative, Microbial, and Enzymatic Degradation. Polym. Eng. Sci. 2020, 60, 2061–2075. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Liu, L.; Xu, M.; Ye, Y.; Zhang, B. On the Degradation of (Micro)Plastics: Degradation Methods, Influencing Factors, Environmental Impacts. Sci. Total Environ. 2022, 806, 151312. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Bakbolat, B.; Daulbayev, C.; Sultanov, F.; Beissenov, R.; Umirzakov, A.; Mereke, A.; Bekbaev, A.; Chuprakov, I. Recent Developments of TiO2-Based Photocatalysis in the Hydrogen Evolution and Photodegradation: A Review. Nanomaterials 2020, 10, 1790. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Jin, L.; He, S.; Li, D.; Zhang, C. Status of Degradable Materials and Their Progress in Marine Research. Packag. Eng. 2020, 41, 108–115. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Li, J.; Deng, J.; Liang, L. Application Progress of Degradable Plastics in Packaging Products. Plast. Sci. Technol. 2021, 49, 94–98. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Christensen, P.A.; Egerton, T.A.; Martins-Franchetti, S.M.; Jin, C.; White, J.R. Photodegradation of Polycaprolactone/Poly(Vinyl Chloride) Blend. Polym. Degrad. Stab. 2008, 93, 305–309. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Najafi, V.; Ahmadi, E.; Ziaee, F.; Omidian, H.; Sedaghat, H. Polyaniline-Modified TiO2, a Highly Effective Photo-Catalyst for Solid-Phase Photocatalytic Degradation of PVC. J. Polym. Environ. 2019, 27, 784–793. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Krzan, A.; Hemjinda, S.; Miertus, S.; Corti, A.; Chiellini, E. Standardization and Certification in the Area of Environmentally Degradable Plastics. Polym. Degrad. Stab. 2006, 91, 2819–2833. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Solaro, R.; Corti, A.; Chiellini, E. Biodegradation of poly(vinyl alcohol) with different molecular weights and degree of hydrolysis. Polym. Adv. Technol. 2000, 11, 873–878. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Lucas, N.; Bienaime, C.; Belloy, C.; Queneudec, M.; Silvestre, F.; Nava-Saucedo, J.-E. Polymer Biodegradation: Mechanisms and Estimation Techniques—A Review. Chemosphere 2008, 73, 429–442. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Liu, B.; Zhang, J.; Guo, H. Research Progress of Polyvinyl Alcohol Water-Resistant Film Materials. Membranes 2022, 12, 347. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Saini, I.; Sharma, A.; Dhiman, R.; Aggarwal, S.; Ram, S.; Sharma, P.K. Grafted SiC Nanocrystals: For Enhanced Optical, Electrical and Mechanical Properties of Polyvinyl Alcohol. J. Alloys Compd. 2017, 714, 172–180. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Panda, P.K.; Yang, J.-M.; Chang, Y.-H. Water-Induced Shape Memory Behavior of Poly (Vinyl Alcohol) and p-Coumaric Acid-Modified Water-Soluble Chitosan Blended Membrane. Carbohydr. Polym. 2021, 257, 117633. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Yang, J.; Panda, P.K.; Jie, C.J.; Dash, P.; Chang, Y. Poly (Vinyl Alcohol)/Chitosan/Sodium Alginate Composite Blended Membrane: Preparation, Characterization, and Water-induced Shape Memory Phenomenon. Polym. Eng. Sci. 2022, 62, 1526–1537. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Moulay, S. Review: Poly(Vinyl Alcohol) Functionalizations and Applications. Polym.-Plast. Technol. Eng. 2015, 54, 1289–1319. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Abdullah, Z.W.; Dong, Y.; Davies, I.J.; Barbhuiya, S. PVA, PVA Blends, and Their Nanocomposites for Biodegradable Packaging Application. Polym.-Plast. Technol. Eng. 2017, 56, 1307–1344. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  60. Teodorescu, M.; Bercea, M.; Morariu, S. Biomaterials of Poly(Vinyl Alcohol) and Natural Polymers. Polym. Rev. 2018, 58, 247–287. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Liu, B.; Huang, X.; Wang, S.; Wang, D.; Guo, H. Performance of Polyvinyl Alcohol/Bagasse Fibre Foamed Composites as Cushion Packaging Materials. Coatings 2021, 11, 1094. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Lv, S.; Liu, C.; Li, H.; Zhang, Y. Assessment of Structural Modification and Time-Dependent Behavior of Poly (Lactic Acid) Based Composites upon Hydrolytic Degradation. Eur. Polym. J. 2022, 166, 111058. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Wang, G.; Huang, D.; Zhang, W.; Ji, J. Degradation Performance of Typical Biodegradable Polyesters in Seawater. J. Funct. Polym. 2020, 33, 492–499. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Shi, L.; Zhu, J.; Shi, J.; Zhao, X. Classification and Identification of Degradable Plastic Products: Current Situation and Prospect. Plast. Addit. 2021, 3, 1–5. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Chen, Z.; Zhao, W.; Xing, R.; Xie, S.; Yang, X.; Cui, P.; Lü, J.; Liao, H.; Yu, Z.; Wang, S.; et al. Enhanced in Situ Biodegradation of Microplastics in Sewage Sludge Using Hyperthermophilic Composting Technology. J. Hazard. Mater. 2020, 384, 121271. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Ammala, A.; Bateman, S.; Dean, K.; Petinakis, E.; Sangwan, P.; Wong, S.; Yuan, Q.; Yu, L.; Patrick, C.; Leong, K.H. An Overview of Degradable and Biodegradable Polyolefins. Prog. Polym. Sci. 2011, 36, 1015–1049. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Chiellini, E.; Corti, A.; D’Antone, S.; Baciu, R. Oxo-Biodegradable Carbon Backbone Polymers—Oxidative Degradation of Polyethylene under Accelerated Test Conditions. Polym. Degrad. Stab. 2006, 91, 2739–2747. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. Chen, L.; Yamane, S.; Sago, T.; Hagihara, H.; Kutsuna, S.; Uchimaru, T.; Suda, H.; Sato, H.; Mizukado, J. Experimental and Modeling Approaches for the Formation of Hydroperoxide during the Auto-Oxidation of Polymers: Thermal-Oxidative Degradation of Polyethylene Oxide. Chem. Phys. Lett. 2016, 657, 83–89. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Madhu, G.; Bhunia, H.; Bajpai, P.K.; Nando, G.B. Physico-Mechanical Properties and Biodegradation of Oxo-Degradable HDPE/PLA Blends. Polym. Sci. Ser. A 2016, 58, 57–75. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Amaral-Zettler, L.A.; Zettler, E.R.; Mincer, T.J. Ecology of the Plastisphere. Nat. Rev. Microbiol. 2020, 18, 139–151. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. Elahi, A.; Bukhari, D.A.; Shamim, S.; Rehman, A. Plastics Degradation by Microbes: A Sustainable Approach. J. King Saud Univ.-Sci. 2021, 33, 101538. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Kyrikou, I.; Briassoulis, D. Biodegradation of Agricultural Plastic Films: A Critical Review. J. Polym. Environ. 2007, 15, 125–150. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. Reddy, R.L.; Reddy, V.S.; Gupta, G.A. Study of Bio-Plastics as Green & Sustainable Alternative to Plastics. Int. J. Emerg. Technol. Adv. Eng. 2013, 3, 82–89. [Google Scholar]
  74. Qin, M.; Chen, C.; Song, B.; Shen, M.; Gong, J. A Review of Biodegradable Plastics to Biodegradable Microplastics: Another Ecological Threat to Soil Environments? J. Clean. Prod. 2021, 312, 127816. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Liwarska-Bizukojc, E. Effect of (Bio)Plastics on Soil Environment: A Review. Sci. Total Environ. 2021, 795, 148889. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  76. Zhang, J.; Gao, D.; Li, Q.; Zhao, Y.; Li, L.; Lin, H.; Bi, Q.; Zhao, Y. Biodegradation of Polyethylene Microplastic Particles by the Fungus Aspergillus flavus from the Guts of Wax Moth Galleria mellonella. Sci. Total Environ. 2020, 704, 135931. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  77. Khoironi, A.; Anggoro, S.; Sudarno, S. Evaluation of the Interaction Among Microalgae Spirulina sp., Plastics Polyethylene Terephthalate and Polypropylene in Freshwater Environment. J. Ecol. Eng. 2019, 20, 161–173. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  78. Song, Y.; Qiu, R.; Hu, J.; Li, X.; He, D. Biodegradation and Disintegration of Expanded Polystyrene by Land Snails Achatina fulica. Sci. Total Environ. 2020, 746, 141289. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  79. Cucina, M.; De Nisi, P.; Trombino, L.; Tambone, F.; Adani, F. Degradation of Bioplastics in Organic Waste by Mesophilic Anaerobic Digestion, Composting and Soil Incubation. Waste Manag. 2021, 134, 67–77. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  80. Edaes, F.S.; De Souza, C.B. Conventional Plastics’ Harmful Effects and Biological and Molecular Strategies for Biodegradable Plastics’ Production. Curr. Biotechnol. 2020, 9, 242–254. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  81. Yu, X.; Chen, L.; Jin, Z.; Jiao, A. Research Progress of Starch-Based Biodegradable Materials: A Review. J. Mater. Sci. 2021, 56, 11187–11208. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  82. Niranjana Prabhu, T.; Prashantha, K. A Review on Present Status and Future Challenges of Starch Based Polymer Films and Their Composites in Food Packaging Applications. Polym. Compos. 2018, 39, 2499–2522. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  83. Cheng, J.; Wu, X.; Tao, Q.; Jiang, N. Research Progress of Starch-Based Plastics. Shanghai Plast. 2020, 1, 4. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  84. Xie, X.; Cui, S.W.; Li, W.; Tsao, R. Isolation and Characterization of Wheat Bran Starch. Food Res. Int. 2008, 41, 882–887. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  85. Martins, I.; Magina, S.P.; Oliveira, L.; Freire, C.; Silvestre, A.; Neto, C.P.; Gandini, A. New Biocomposites Based on Thermoplastic Starch and Bacterial Cellulose. Compos. Sci. Technol. 2009, 69, 2163–2168. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  86. Punia, S. Barley Starch Modifications: Physical, Chemical and Enzymatic—A Review. Int. J. Biol. Macromol. 2020, 144, 578–585. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  87. Fitch-Vargas, P.R.; Camacho-Hernández, I.L.; Martínez-Bustos, F.; Islas-Rubio, A.R.; Carrillo-Cañedo, K.I.; Calderón-Castro, A.; Jacobo-Valenzuela, N.; Carrillo-López, A.; Delgado-Nieblas, C.I.; Aguilar-Palazuelos, E. Mechanical, Physical and Microstructural Properties of Acetylated Starch-Based Biocomposites Reinforced with Acetylated Sugarcane Fiber. Carbohydr. Polym. 2019, 219, 378–386. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  88. Lauer, M.K.; Smith, R.C. Recent Advances in Starch-Based Films toward Food Packaging Applications: Physicochemical, Mechanical, and Functional Properties. Compr. Rev. Food Sci. Food Saf. 2020, 19, 3031–3083. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  89. Hammache, Y.; Serier, A.; Chaoui, S. The Effect of Thermoplastic Starch on the Properties of Polypropylene/High Density Polyethylene Blend Reinforced by Nano-Clay. Mater. Res. Express 2020, 7, 025308. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  90. Wu, H.; Lei, Y.; Lu, J.; Zhu, R.; Xiao, D.; Jiao, C.; Xia, R.; Zhang, Z.; Shen, G.; Liu, Y.; et al. Effect of Citric Acid Induced Crosslinking on the Structure and Properties of Potato Starch/Chitosan Composite Films. Food Hydrocoll. 2019, 97, 105208. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  91. Méité, N.; Konan, L.K.; Tognonvi, M.T.; Oyetola, S. Effect of Metakaolin Content on Mechanical and Water Barrier Properties of Cassava Starch Films. S. Afr. J. Chem. Eng. 2022, 40, 186–194. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  92. Mittal, A.; Garg, S.; Bajpai, S. Fabrication and Characteristics of Poly (Vinyl Alcohol)-Starch-Cellulosic Material Based Biodegradable Composite Film for Packaging Application. Mater. Today Proc. 2020, 21, 1577–1582. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  93. Guo, B.; Wang, L.-J.; Yin, P.; Li, B.-G.; Li, P.-X. Ultra-High Molecular Weight Polyethylene Fiber-Reinforced Thermoplastic Corn Starch Composite. J. Thermoplast. Compos. Mater. 2017, 30, 564–577. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  94. Liu, Y.; Sui, Y.; Liu, C.; Liu, C.; Wu, M.; Li, B.; Li, Y. A Physically Crosslinked Polydopamine/Nanocellulose Hydrogel as Potential Versatile Vehicles for Drug Delivery and Wound Healing. Carbohydr. Polym. 2018, 188, 27–36. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  95. Liu, Y.; Long, K.; Mi, H.; Cha, R.; Jiang, X. High-Efficiency Transfer of Fingerprints from Various Surfaces Using Nanofibrillated Cellulose. Nanoscale Horiz. 2019, 4, 953–959. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  96. Wang, H.; Xie, H.; Du, H.; Wang, X.; Liu, W.; Duan, Y.; Zhang, X.; Sun, L.; Zhang, X.; Si, C. Highly Efficient Preparation of Functional and Thermostable Cellulose Nanocrystals via H2SO4 Intensified Acetic Acid Hydrolysis. Carbohydr. Polym. 2020, 239, 116233. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  97. Jaffar, S.S.; Saallah, S.; Misson, M.; Siddiquee, S.; Roslan, J.; Saalah, S.; Lenggoro, W. Recent Development and Environmental Applications of Nanocellulose-Based Membranes. Membranes 2022, 12, 287. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  98. Liu, Y.; Ahmed, S.; Sameen, D.E.; Wang, Y.; Lu, R.; Dai, J.; Li, S.; Qin, W. A Review of Cellulose and Its Derivatives in Biopolymer-Based for Food Packaging Application. Trends Food Sci. Technol. 2021, 112, 532–546. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  99. Pooresmaeil, M.; Behzadi Nia, S.; Namazi, H. Green Encapsulation of LDH(Zn/Al)-5-Fu with Carboxymethyl Cellulose Biopolymer; New Nanovehicle for Oral Colorectal Cancer Treatment. Int. J. Biol. Macromol. 2019, 139, 994–1001. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  100. Zhang, M.; Biesold, G.M.; Choi, W.; Yu, J.; Deng, Y.; Silvestre, C.; Lin, Z. Recent Advances in Polymers and Polymer Composites for Food Packaging. Mater. Today 2022, 53, 134–161. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  101. David, G.; Gontard, N.; Angellier-Coussy, H. Mitigating the Impact of Cellulose Particles on the Performance of Biopolyester-Based Composites by Gas-Phase Esterification. Polymers 2019, 11, 200. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  102. Rajeswari, A.; Christy, E.J.S.; Swathi, E.; Pius, A. Fabrication of Improved Cellulose Acetate-Based Biodegradable Films for Food Packaging Applications. Environ. Chem. Ecotoxicol. 2020, 2, 107–114. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  103. Ariffin, H.; Norrrahim, M.N.F.; Yasim-Anuar, T.A.T.; Nishida, H.; Hassan, M.A.; Ibrahim, N.A.; Yunus, W.M.Z.W. Oil Palm Biomass Cellulose-Fabricated Polylactic Acid Composites for Packaging Applications. In Bionanocomposites for Packaging Applications; Jawaid, M., Swain, S.K., Eds.; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2018; pp. 95–105. ISBN 978-3-319-67319-6. [Google Scholar]
  104. Li, H.; Shi, H.; He, Y.; Fei, X.; Peng, L. Preparation and Characterization of Carboxymethyl Cellulose-Based Composite Films Reinforced by Cellulose Nanocrystals Derived from Pea Hull Waste for Food Packaging Applications. Int. J. Biol. Macromol. 2020, 164, 4104–4112. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  105. Yang, Y.; Shi, Y.; Cao, X.; Liu, Q.; Wang, H.; Kong, B. Preparation and Functional Properties of Poly(Vinyl Alcohol)/Ethyl Cellulose/Tea Polyphenol Electrospun Nanofibrous Films for Active Packaging Material. Food Control 2021, 130, 108331. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  106. Kumar, S.; Mukherjee, A.; Dutta, J. Chitosan Based Nanocomposite Films and Coatings: Emerging Antimicrobial Food Packaging Alternatives. Trends Food Sci. Technol. 2020, 97, 196–209. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  107. Panda, P.K.; Dash, P.; Yang, J.-M.; Chang, Y.-H. Development of Chitosan, Graphene Oxide, and Cerium Oxide Composite Blended Films: Structural, Physical, and Functional Properties. Cellulose 2022, 29, 2399–2411. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  108. Zhang, X.; Zhang, Z.; Wu, W.; Yang, J.; Yang, Q. Preparation and Characterization of Chitosan/Nano-ZnO Composite Film with Antimicrobial Activity. Bioprocess Biosyst. Eng. 2021, 44, 1193–1199. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  109. Zhang, S.; Li, J.; Li, J.; Du, N.; Li, D.; Li, F.; Man, J. Application Status and Technical Analysis of Chitosan-Based Medical Dressings: A Review. RSC Adv. 2020, 10, 34308–34322. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  110. Zhang, X.; Wei, Y.; Chen, M.; Xiao, N.; Zhang, J.; Liu, C. Development of Functional Chitosan-Based Composite Films Incorporated with Hemicelluloses: Effect on Physicochemical Properties. Carbohydr. Polym. 2020, 246, 116489. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  111. Al-Tayyar, N.A.; Youssef, A.M.; Al-hindi, R. Antimicrobial Food Packaging Based on Sustainable Bio-Based Materials for Reducing Foodborne Pathogens: A Review. Food Chem. 2020, 310, 125915. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  112. Liang, J.; Wang, R.; Chen, R. The Impact of Cross-Linking Mode on the Physical and Antimicrobial Properties of a Chitosan/Bacterial Cellulose Composite. Polymers 2019, 11, 491. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  113. Khouri, J.; Penlidis, A.; Moresoli, C. Viscoelastic Properties of Crosslinked Chitosan Films. Processes 2019, 7, 157. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  114. Wang, Y.; Du, H.; Xie, M.; Ma, G.; Yang, W.; Hu, Q.; Pei, F. Characterization of the Physical Properties and Biological Activity of Chitosan Films Grafted with Gallic Acid and Caffeic Acid: A Comparison Study. Food Packag. Shelf Life 2019, 22, 100401. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  115. Argüelles-Monal, W.M.; Lizardi-Mendoza, J.; Fernández-Quiroz, D.; Recillas-Mota, M.T.; Montiel-Herrera, M. Chitosan Derivatives: Introducing New Functionalities with a Controlled Molecular Architecture for Innovative Materials. Polymers 2018, 10, 342. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  116. Ardebilchi Marand, S.; Almasi, H.; Ardebilchi Marand, N. Chitosan-Based Nanocomposite Films Incorporated with NiO Nanoparticles: Physicochemical, Photocatalytic and Antimicrobial Properties. Int. J. Biol. Macromol. 2021, 190, 667–678. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  117. Ji, M.; Li, J.; Li, F.; Wang, X.; Man, J.; Li, J.; Zhang, C.; Peng, S. A Biodegradable Chitosan-Based Composite Film Reinforced by Ramie Fibre and Lignin for Food Packaging. Carbohydr. Polym. 2022, 281, 119078. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  118. Peñas, M.I.; Pérez-Camargo, R.A.; Hernández, R.; Müller, A.J. A Review on Current Strategies for the Modulation of Thermomechanical, Barrier, and Biodegradation Properties of Poly (Butylene Succinate) (PBS) and Its Random Copolymers. Polymers 2022, 14, 1025. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  119. Kim, H.S.; Kim, H.J.; Lee, J.W.; Choi, I.G. Biodegradability of Bio-Flour Filled Biodegradable Poly(Butylene Succinate) Bio-Composites in Natural and Compost Soil. Polym. Degrad. Stab. 2006, 91, 1117–1127. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  120. Aliotta, L.; Seggiani, M.; Lazzeri, A.; Gigante, V.; Cinelli, P. A Brief Review of Poly (Butylene Succinate) (PBS) and Its Main Copolymers: Synthesis, Blends, Composites, Biodegradability, and Applications. Polymers 2022, 14, 844. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  121. Zini, E.; Scandola, M. Green Composites: An Overview. Polym. Compos. 2011, 32, 1905–1915. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  122. Platnieks, O.; Gaidukovs, S.; Kumar Thakur, V.; Barkane, A.; Beluns, S. Bio-Based Poly (Butylene Succinate): Recent Progress, Challenges and Future Opportunities. Eur. Polym. J. 2021, 161, 110855. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  123. Ferreira, F.V.; Dufresne, A.; Pinheiro, I.F.; Souza, D.H.S.; Gouveia, R.F.; Mei, L.H.I.; Lona, L.M.F. How Do Cellulose Nanocrystals Affect the Overall Properties of Biodegradable Polymer Nanocomposites: A Comprehensive Review. Eur. Polym. J. 2018, 108, 274–285. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  124. Coltelli, M.-B.; Aliotta, L.; Gigante, V.; Bellusci, M.; Cinelli, P.; Bugnicourt, E.; Schmid, M.; Staebler, A.; Lazzeri, A. Preparation and Compatibilization of PBS/Whey Protein Isolate Based Blends. Molecules 2020, 25, 3313. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  125. Su, S.; Kopitzky, R.; Tolga, S.; Kabasci, S. Polylactide (PLA) and Its Blends with Poly(Butylene Succinate) (PBS): A Brief Review. Polymers 2019, 11, 1193. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  126. Barletta, M.; Puopolo, M. Thermoforming of Compostable PLA/PBS Blends Reinforced with Highly Hygroscopic Calcium Carbonate. J. Manuf. Process. 2020, 56, 1185–1192. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  127. Sadeghi, A.; Mousavi, S.M.; Saljoughi, E.; Kiani, S. Biodegradable Membrane Based on Polycaprolactone/Polybutylene Succinate: Characterization and Performance Evaluation in Wastewater Treatment. J. Appl. Polym. Sci. 2021, 138, 50332. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  128. Srithep, Y.; Veang-in, O.; Pholharn, D.; Turng, L.-S.; Morris, J. Improving Polylactide Toughness by Plasticizing with Low Molecular Weight Polylactide-Poly(Butylene Succinate) Copolymer. J. Renew. Mater. 2021, 9, 1267. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  129. Zeng, J.-B.; Huang, C.-L.; Jiao, L.; Lu, X.; Wang, Y.-Z.; Wang, X.-L. Synthesis and Properties of Biodegradable Poly(Butylene Succinate-Co-Diethylene Glycol Succinate) Copolymers. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 2012, 51, 12258–12265. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  130. Mochane, M.J.; Magagula, S.I.; Sefadi, J.S.; Mokhena, T.C. A Review on Green Composites Based on Natural Fiber-Reinforced Polybutylene Succinate (PBS). Polymers 2021, 13, 1200. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  131. Cosquer, R.; Pruvost, S.; Gouanvé, F. Improvement of Barrier Properties of Biodegradable Polybutylene Succinate/Graphene Nanoplatelets Nanocomposites Prepared by Melt Process. Membranes 2021, 11, 151. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  132. Popa, M.S.; Frone, A.N.; Panaitescu, D.M. Polyhydroxybutyrate Blends: A Solution for Biodegradable Packaging? Int. J. Biol. Macromol. 2022, 207, 263–277. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  133. Jian, J.; Xiangbin, Z.; Xianbo, H. An Overview on Synthesis, Properties and Applications of Poly(Butylene-Adipate-Co-Terephthalate)–PBAT. Adv. Ind. Eng. Polym. Res. 2020, 3, 19–26. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  134. Coiai, S.; Di Lorenzo, M.L.; Cinelli, P.; Righetti, M.C.; Passaglia, E. Binary Green Blends of Poly(Lactic Acid) with Poly(Butylene Adipate-Co-Butylene Terephthalate) and Poly(Butylene Succinate-Co-Butylene Adipate) and Their Nanocomposites. Polymers 2021, 13, 2489. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  135. Moustafa, H.; Youssef, A.M.; Darwish, N.A.; Abou-Kandil, A.I. Eco-Friendly Polymer Composites for Green Packaging: Future Vision and Challenges. Compos. Part B Eng. 2019, 172, 16–25. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  136. Rodrigues, B.V.M.; Silva, A.S.; Melo, G.F.S.; Vasconscellos, L.M.R.; Marciano, F.R.; Lobo, A.O. Influence of Low Contents of Superhydrophilic MWCNT on the Properties and Cell Viability of Electrospun Poly (Butylene Adipate-Co-Terephthalate) Fibers. Mater. Sci. Eng. C 2016, 59, 782–791. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  137. Rios, J.; Lebeau, J.; Yang, T.; Li, S.; Lynch, M.D. A Critical Review on the Progress and Challenges to a More Sustainable, Cost Competitive Synthesis of Adipic Acid. Green Chem. 2021, 23, 3172–3190. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  138. Pérez-Camargo, R.A.; Fernández-d’Arlas, B.; Cavallo, D.; Debuissy, T.; Pollet, E.; Avérous, L.; Müller, A.J. Tailoring the Structure, Morphology, and Crystallization of Isodimorphic Poly(Butylene Succinate-Ran-Butylene Adipate) Random Copolymers by Changing Composition and Thermal History. Macromolecules 2017, 50, 597–608. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  139. Nunes, M.A.B.S.; Marinho, V.A.D.; Falcão, G.A.M.; Canedo, E.L.; Bardi, M.A.G.; Carvalho, L.H. Rheological, Mechanical and Morphological Properties of Poly(Butylene Adipate-Co-Terephthalate)/Thermoplastic Starch Blends and Its Biocomposite with Babassu Mesocarp. Polym. Test. 2018, 70, 281–288. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  140. Xiong, S.-J.; Pang, B.; Zhou, S.-J.; Li, M.-K.; Yang, S.; Wang, Y.-Y.; Shi, Q.; Wang, S.-F.; Yuan, T.-Q.; Sun, R.-C. Economically Competitive Biodegradable PBAT/Lignin Composites: Effect of Lignin Methylation and Compatibilizer. ACS Sustain. Chem. Eng. 2020, 8, 5338–5346. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  141. Zhai, X.; Wang, W.; Zhang, H.; Dai, Y.; Dong, H.; Hou, H. Effects of High Starch Content on the Physicochemical Properties of Starch/PBAT Nanocomposite Films Prepared by Extrusion Blowing. Carbohydr. Polym. 2020, 239, 116231. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  142. Raja, V.; Natesan, R. TiO2 Nanoparticles/Poly(Butylene Adipate-co-terephthalate) Bionanocomposite Films for Packaging Applications. Polym. Adv. Technol. 2017, 28, 1699–1706. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  143. de Matos Costa, A.R.; Crocitti, A.; Hecker de Carvalho, L.; Carroccio, S.C.; Cerruti, P.; Santagata, G. Properties of Biodegradable Films Based on Poly(Butylene Succinate) (PBS) and Poly(Butylene Adipate-Co-Terephthalate) (PBAT) Blends. Polymers 2020, 12, 2317. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  144. Labet, M.; Thielemans, W. Synthesis of Polycaprolactone: A Review. Chem. Soc. Rev. 2009, 38, 3484–3504. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  145. Woodruff, M.A.; Hutmacher, D.W. The Return of a Forgotten Polymer—Polycaprolactone in the 21st Century. Prog. Polym. Sci. 2010, 35, 1217–1256. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  146. Elzubair, A.; Elias, C.N.; Suarez, J.C.M.; Lopes, H.P.; Vieira, M.V.B. The Physical Characterization of a Thermoplastic Polymer for Endodontic Obturation. J. Dent. 2006, 34, 784–789. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  147. Bouakaz, B.S.; Habi, A.; Grohens, Y.; Pillin, I. Organomontmorillonite/Graphene-PLA/PCL Nanofilled Blends: New Strategy to Enhance the Functional Properties of PLA/PCL Blend. Appl. Clay Sci. 2017, 139, 81–91. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  148. Gutiérrez, T.J.; Mendieta, J.R.; Ortega-Toro, R. In-Depth Study from Gluten/PCL-Based Food Packaging Films Obtained under Reactive Extrusion Conditions Using Chrome Octanoate as a Potential Food Grade Catalyst. Food Hydrocoll. 2021, 111, 106255. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  149. Mohamed, R.M.; Yusoh, K. A Review on the Recent Research of Polycaprolactone (PCL). Adv. Mater. Res. 2016, 1134, 249–255. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  150. Thakur, M.; Majid, I.; Hussain, S.; Nanda, V. Poly(ε-Caprolactone): A Potential Polymer for Biodegradable Food Packaging Applications. Packag. Technol. Sci. 2021, 34, 449–461. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  151. Dorati, R.; Pisani, S.; Maffeis, G.; Conti, B.; Modena, T.; Chiesa, E.; Bruni, G.; Musazzi, U.M.; Genta, I. Study on Hydrophilicity and Degradability of Chitosan/Polylactide-Co-Polycaprolactone Nanofibre Blend Electrospun Membrane. Carbohydr. Polym. 2018, 199, 150–160. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  152. Przybysz, M.; Hejna, A.; Haponiuk, J.; Formela, K. Structural and Thermo-Mechanical Properties of Poly(ε-Caprolactone) Modified by Various Peroxide Initiators. Polymers 2019, 11, 1101. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  153. Hadj-Hamou, A.S.; Yahiaoui, F. Performances of PCL/PVC/Organoclay Nanobioblends Films for Packaging Applications. Macromol. Symp. 2019, 386, 1800239. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  154. Sadeghi, A.; Razavi, S.M.A.; Shahrampour, D. Fabrication and Characterization of Biodegradable Active Films with Modified Morphology Based on Polycaprolactone-Polylactic Acid-Green Tea Extract. Int. J. Biol. Macromol. 2022, 205, 341–356. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  155. Aragosa, A.; Specchia, V.; Frigione, M. PHB Produced by Bacteria Present in the Argan Field Soil: A New Perspective for the Synthesis of the Bio-Based Polymer. Proceedings 2020, 69, 5. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  156. Muneer, F.; Rasul, I.; Azeem, F.; Siddique, M.H.; Zubair, M.; Nadeem, H. Microbial Polyhydroxyalkanoates (PHAs): Efficient Replacement of Synthetic Polymers. J. Polym. Environ. 2020, 28, 2301–2323. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  157. Sharma, V.; Sehgal, R.; Gupta, R. Polyhydroxyalkanoate (PHA): Properties and Modifications. Polymer 2021, 212, 123161. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  158. Tripathi, A.D.; Mishra, P.K.; Darani, K.K.; Agarwal, A.; Paul, V. Hydrothermal Treatment of Lignocellulose Waste for the Production of Polyhydroxyalkanoates Copolymer with Potential Application in Food Packaging. Trends Food Sci. Technol. 2022, 123, 233–250. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  159. Kumar, V.; Sehgal, R.; Gupta, R. Blends and Composites of Polyhydroxyalkanoates (PHAs) and Their Applications. Eur. Polym. J. 2021, 161, 110824. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  160. Raza, Z.A.; Abid, S.; Banat, I.M. Polyhydroxyalkanoates: Characteristics, Production, Recent Developments and Applications. Int. Biodeterior. Biodegrad. 2018, 126, 45–56. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  161. Pakalapati, H.; Chang, C.-K.; Show, P.L.; Arumugasamy, S.K.; Lan, J.C.-W. Development of Polyhydroxyalkanoates Production from Waste Feedstocks and Applications. J. Biosci. Bioeng. 2018, 126, 282–292. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  162. Tan, D.; Wang, Y.; Tong, Y.; Chen, G.-Q. Grand Challenges for Industrializing Polyhydroxyalkanoates (PHAs). Trends Biotechnol. 2021, 39, 953–963. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  163. Sun, S.; Liu, P.; Ji, N.; Hou, H.; Dong, H. Effects of Various Cross-Linking Agents on the Physicochemical Properties of Starch/PHA Composite Films Produced by Extrusion Blowing. Food Hydrocoll. 2018, 77, 964–975. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  164. Lugoloobi, I.; Li, X.; Zhang, Y.; Mao, Z.; Wang, B.; Sui, X.; Feng, X. Fabrication of Lignin/Poly(3-Hydroxybutyrate) Nanocomposites with Enhanced Properties via a Pickering Emulsion Approach. Int. J. Biol. Macromol. 2020, 165, 3078–3087. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  165. Torğut, G.; Gürler, N. Nanofiller Reinforced Biodegradable PHA/PLA Composites: Physico-Chemical, Thermal and Dielectric Properties. J. Polym. Res. 2021, 28, 452. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  166. Singh, A.A.; Sharma, S.; Srivastava, M.; Majumdar, A. Modulating the Properties of Polylactic Acid for Packaging Applications Using Biobased Plasticizers and Naturally Obtained Fillers. Int. J. Biol. Macromol. 2020, 153, 1165–1175. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  167. Cabrera-González, M.; Ahmed, A.; Maamo, K.; Salem, M.; Jordan, C.; Harasek, M. Evaluation of Nanofiltration Membranes for Pure Lactic Acid Permeability. Membranes 2022, 12, 302. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  168. Qin, Y.; Li, W.; Liu, D.; Yuan, M.; Li, L. Development of Active Packaging Film Made from Poly (Lactic Acid) Incorporated Essential Oil. Prog. Org. Coat. 2017, 103, 76–82. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  169. Messin, T.; Marais, S.; Follain, N.; Guinault, A.; Gaucher, V.; Delpouve, N.; Sollogoub, C. Biodegradable PLA/PBS Multinanolayer Membrane with Enhanced Barrier Performances. J. Membr. Sci. 2020, 598, 117777. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  170. Nofar, M.; Sacligil, D.; Carreau, P.J.; Kamal, M.R.; Heuzey, M.-C. Poly (Lactic Acid) Blends: Processing, Properties and Applications. Int. J. Biol. Macromol. 2019, 125, 307–360. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  171. Lv, S.; Zhang, Y.; Gu, J.; Tan, H. Physicochemical Evolutions of Starch/Poly (Lactic Acid) Composite Biodegraded in Real Soil. J. Environ. Manag. 2018, 228, 223–231. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  172. Valentina, I.; Haroutioun, A.; Fabrice, L.; Vincent, V.; Roberto, P. Poly(Lactic Acid)-Based Nanobiocomposites with Modulated Degradation Rates. Materials 2018, 11, 1943. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  173. Limsukon, W.; Auras, R.; Selke, S. Hydrolytic Degradation and Lifetime Prediction of Poly(Lactic Acid) Modified with a Multifunctional Epoxy-Based Chain Extender. Polym. Test. 2019, 80, 106108. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  174. Lv, S. Degradation Behavior and Mechanism of Poly(1actic Acid)Based Composites. Ph.D. Thesis, Northeast Forest University, Harbin, China, 2019. [Google Scholar]
  175. Piemonte, V.; Sabatini, S.; Gironi, F. Chemical Recycling of PLA: A Great Opportunity Towards the Sustainable Development? J. Polym. Environ. 2013, 21, 640–647. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  176. Ainali, N.M.; Kalaronis, D.; Evgenidou, E.; Kyzas, G.Z.; Bobori, D.C.; Kaloyianni, M.; Yang, X.; Bikiaris, D.N.; Lambropoulou, D.A. Do Poly(Lactic Acid) Microplastics Instigate a Threat? A Perception for Their Dynamic towards Environmental Pollution and Toxicity. Sci. Total Environ. 2022, 832, 155014. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  177. Nair, L.S.; Laurencin, C.T. Biodegradable Polymers as Biomaterials. Prog. Polym. Sci. 2007, 32, 762–798. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  178. Li, F.; Zhang, C.; Weng, Y.; Diao, X.; Zhou, Y.; Song, X. Enhancement of Gas Barrier Properties of Graphene Oxide/Poly (Lactic Acid) Films Using a Solvent-Free Method. Materials 2020, 13, 3024. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  179. Jing, M.; Che, J.; Xu, S.; Liu, Z.; Fu, Q. The Effect of Surface Modification of Glass Fiber on the Performance of Poly(Lactic Acid) Composites: Graphene Oxide vs. Silane Coupling Agents. Appl. Surf. Sci. 2018, 435, 1046–1056. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  180. Qian, S.; Zhang, H.; Yao, W.; Sheng, K. Effects of Bamboo Cellulose Nanowhisker Content on the Morphology, Crystallization, Mechanical, and Thermal Properties of PLA Matrix Biocomposites. Compos. Part B Eng. 2018, 133, 203–209. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  181. Alias, A.R.; Wan, M.K.; Sarbon, N.M. Emerging Materials and Technologies of Multi-Layer Film for Food Packaging Application: A Review. Food Control 2022, 136, 108875. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  182. Ordoñez, R.; Atarés, L.; Chiralt, A. Properties of PLA Films with Cinnamic Acid: Effect of the Processing Method. Food Bioprod. Process. 2022, 133, 25–33. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  183. Lee, W.; Lee, J.; Chung, J.W.; Kwak, S.-Y. Enhancement of Tensile Toughness of Poly(Lactic Acid) (PLA) through Blending of a Polydecalactone-Grafted Cellulose Copolymer: The Effect of Mesophase Transition on Mechanical Properties. Int. J. Biol. Macromol. 2021, 193, 1103–1113. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  184. Sebastian, A.D.; Sneck, S.I.; Soderlund, M.J. Package Wrapping Including PLA Film with Moisture Barrier by Atomic Layer Deposition. WO2018013367A1, 18 January 2018. [Google Scholar]
  185. Huiqun, W. Biodegradable Material, Preparation Method and Use Thereof. WO/2014/056293, 17 April 2014. [Google Scholar]
  186. Peter, A.; Mihaly, C.A.; Nicula, C.; Mihaly, C.L.; Talaşman, C.M.; Căpriţă, F.-C.; Constantin, C.; Dumitraşcu, I.; Drazic, G.; Bele, M.; et al. Process for Producing Active Food Packaging Based on Polylactic Acid Modified with Nanocomposite. Romania Patent RO134492A0, 30 October 2020. [Google Scholar]
Membranes 12 00500 g001 550
Figure 1. The mechanism of photodegradation.
Figure 1. The mechanism of photodegradation.
Membranes 12 00500 g001
Membranes 12 00500 g003 550
Figure 3. The mechanism of biodegradation.
Figure 3. The mechanism of biodegradation.
Membranes 12 00500 g003
Table
Table 1. The classification and characteristic of degradable plastics.
Table 1. The classification and characteristic of degradable plastics.
ClassificationCategoryFeatures
By degradation principleBiodegradable plasticsSimilar performance to traditional plastics, good degradability, high safety
Photodegradable plasticsSimple and low cost production process
Thermal oxidative degradation plasticsRequires oxygen and heat
Hydrodegradable plasticsShort degradation time, no trace, no pollution, low cost
By degradation characteristicsFully degradable plasticsCompletely disintegrates and leaves no trace
Incomplete degradable plasticsPartial degradation
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Guo, C.; Guo, H. Progress in the Degradability of Biodegradable Film Materials for Packaging. Membranes 2022, 12, 500. https://doi.org/10.3390/membranes12050500

AMA Style

Guo C, Guo H. Progress in the Degradability of Biodegradable Film Materials for Packaging. Membranes. 2022; 12(5):500. https://doi.org/10.3390/membranes12050500

Chicago/Turabian Style

Guo, Chuanyan, and Hongge Guo. 2022. "Progress in the Degradability of Biodegradable Film Materials for Packaging" Membranes 12, no. 5: 500. https://doi.org/10.3390/membranes12050500

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop