Antimicrobial and Physicochemical Characterization of

Subscriber access provided by UNIV OF NEBRASKA - LINCOLN

Article

Antimicrobial and Physicochemical Characterization of Biodegradable, Nitric Oxide-Releasing Nanocellulose-Chitosan Packaging Membranes Jaya Sundaram, Jitendra Pant, Marcus James Goudie, Sudhagar Mani, and Hitesh Handa J. Agric. Food Chem., Just Accepted Manuscript • DOI: 10.1021/acs.jafc.6b01936 • Publication Date (Web): 03 Jun 2016 Downloaded from http://pubs.acs.org on June 8, 2016

Just Accepted “Just Accepted” manuscripts have been peer-reviewed and accepted for publication. They are posted online prior to technical editing, formatting for publication and author proofing. The American Chemical Society provides “Just Accepted” as a free service to the research community to expedite the dissemination of scientific material as soon as possible after acceptance. “Just Accepted” manuscripts appear in full in PDF format accompanied by an HTML abstract. “Just Accepted” manuscripts have been fully peer reviewed, but should not be considered the official version of record. They are accessible to all readers and citable by the Digital Object Identifier (DOI®). “Just Accepted” is an optional service offered to authors. Therefore, the “Just Accepted” Web site may not include all articles that will be published in the journal. After a manuscript is technically edited and formatted, it will be removed from the “Just Accepted” Web site and published as an ASAP article. Note that technical editing may introduce minor changes to the manuscript text and/or graphics which could affect content, and all legal disclaimers and ethical guidelines that apply to the journal pertain. ACS cannot be held responsible for errors or consequences arising from the use of information contained in these “Just Accepted” manuscripts.

Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry is published by the American Chemical Society. 1155 Sixteenth Street N.W., Washington, DC 20036 Published by American Chemical Society. Copyright © American Chemical Society. However, no copyright claim is made to original U.S. Government works, or works produced by employees of any Commonwealth realm Crown government in the course of their duties.

Page 1 of 29

Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry

1

Antimicrobial and Physicochemical Characterization of Biodegradable, Nitric Oxide-

2

Releasing Nanocellulose-Chitosan Packaging Membranes

3 4

Jaya Sundaram*, Jitendra Pant, Marcus J. Goudie, Sudhagar Mani, Hitesh Handa*

5

School of Biological and Biochemical Engineering, College of Engineering, University of

6

Georgia, Athens, GA, USA

7 8 9

*Corresponding Authors: Jaya Sundaram

10

College of Engineering

11

University of Georgia

12

597 D W Brooks Dr

13

Athens, GA 30602

14

Telephone: (706) 542-3815

15

E-mail: jayas@engr,uga.edu

16 17

Hitesh Handa

18

College of Engineering

19

University of Georgia

20

220 Riverbend Road

21

Athens, GA 30602

22

Telephone: (706) 542-8109

23

E-mail: [email protected]

1 ACS Paragon Plus Environment


Page 2 of 29

24

Abstract

25

Biodegradable composite membranes with antimicrobial properties consisting of nanocellulose

26

fibrils, chitosan, and S-Nitroso-N-acetylpenicillamine (SNAP) were developed and tested for

27

food packaging applications. Nitric oxide donor, SNAP was encapsulated into completely

28

dispersed chitosan in 100 mL, 0.1N acetic acid and was thoroughly mixed with nanocellulose

29

fibrils (CNF) to produce a composite membrane. The fabricated membranes had a uniform

30

dispersion of chitosan and SNAP within the nanocellulose fibrils, which was confirmed through

31

Scanning Electron Microscopy (SEM) micrographs and chemiluminescence nitric oxide

32

analyzer. The membranes prepared without SNAP showed low water vapor permeability than

33

that of the membranes with SNAP. The addition of SNAP resulted in a decrease in the Young’s

34

modulus for both 2-layer and 3-layer membrane configurations.

35

evaluation of SNAP incorporated membranes showed an effective zone of inhibition against

36

bacterial strains of Enterococcus faecalis, Staphylococcus aureus, and Listeria monocytogenes

37

and demonstrated its potential applications for food packaging.

38

Keywords: nanocellulose fibrils; nitric oxide; SNAP; chitosan; antimicrobial; biodegradable;

39

packaging membranes; zone of inhibition

40 41 42 43 44 45 46


Antimicrobial property

Page 3 of 29

47


Introduction

48

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), estimates that one in every six

49

Americans gets sick from foodborne illness each year, results in 128,000 hospitalizations and

50

3,000 deaths. Foodborne pathogens deteriorate the quality of food, causing increased food

51

wastage. Recent foodborne microbial outbreaks are driving a search for innovative ways to

52

inhibit microbial growth in foods while maintaining quality, freshness, and safety and extend the

53

shelf-life of fresh produces. The Federal government advises and encourages healthy eating

54

habits, which includes consumption of a variety of fresh fruits and vegetables1, 2. As a result, the

55

per capita consumption of eating fresh produce has increased to $12 billion annual sales in the

56

past few years3,4 and the fresh-cut food industry sector becomes the fastest growing segment of

57

food industries. As the fresh-cut produce market continues to grow, such producers face the

58

challenge of an increase in microbial safety for longer shelf life. From 1996 to 2006, 22

59

foodborne illness outbreaks were associated with the consumption of fresh produce. Of these

60

outbreaks, according to Food and Drug Administration (FDA), 18 outbreaks were implicated by

61

fresh-cut produce. Foodborne illness outbreaks also impact the fresh produce trade leading to

62

economic losses4. Food related epidemic can be prevented by means of improved surveillance

63

and detection of contaminations, enhanced epidemiological investigation, safe packaging, and

64

effective methods to identify pathogens5-10.

65

The packaging of fresh fruits and vegetables is one of the most important steps in the long

66

supply chain from the producer to the consumer. Protecting the fresh produce by packing them in

67

antimicrobial (AM) films can extend their shelf life of food11-14. They also effectively control the

68

foodborne pathogens and food-spoiling microorganisms.

69

manufactured by incorporating antimicrobial agents, immobilized or coated on the surface of the


These packages are typically


70

packaging material. Even though the AM packaging films and number of antimicrobial agents

71

have been studied for many years, commercial successes of these packaging materials are very

72

limited due to many constrains in large scale production15. Selection of packaging system and the

73

antimicrobial agents are very critical as they would influence the inherent physicochemical

74

properties of food. Now there is also an increasing demand for green labeling and environmental

75

safety, leading to an increasing number of R & D efforts in the field of biodegradable food

76

packaging materials. Instead of using polymer materials derived from petroleum products,

77

biopolymers derived from renewable sources (starch, cellulose, protein etc.) are more favorable

78

in developing an eco-friendly packaging system for food. When the antimicrobial agents are

79

combined with biodegradable packaging materials, it features the merits of the packaging system

80

in terms of food safety, shelf-life, and environmental friendliness.

81

Cellulose is one of the most abundantly available biopolymers. The cellulose pulp derived from

82

plants and trees are either mechanically or chemically fibrillated into nanocellulose fibrils (CNF)

83

having 5-20 nm diameter. These nanocellulose fibrils highly influence the properties and

84

functionality of the final products16-19. George et al made food packaging membrane using

85

nanocellulose derived from bacterial cellulose and demonstrated its relevance as a packaging

86

material for the food industry20. The prepared membrane possessed minimal oxygen

87

permeability, good mechanical stability, and controlled water permeability, which are critical for

88

food packaging materials to maintain the quality of packed food. Reinforcing nanocellulose with

89

other long chain polymers such as chitosan to develop biodegradable nanocomposite food

90

packaging materials can further improve the quality of the packaging material as well as long

91

storage life21. Chitosan is a linear polysaccharide, deacetylated derivative of chitin, which is the

92

second most abundant polysaccharide found in nature after cellulose. Chitosan is nontoxic,


Page 4 of 29

Page 5 of 29


93

biodegradable, and biocompatible with antimicrobial characteristics as well and it could be used

94

as a packaging material for the quality preservation of food22, 23, 24.

95

Antimicrobial films with controlled release of antimicrobial agents are more advantageous

96

than dipping or spraying the food with antimicrobial agents containing edible polymers25-27. In

97

these types of coatings, the antimicrobial activity is lost due to its inactivation by the food

98

components leading to concentrations dropping below active levels28. There are several

99

antimicrobial agents available to incorporate into packaging films. However, each one has its

100

own disadvantages apart from their noted advantages. Sodium nitrite salt has been used for

101

centuries in meat curing. Nitric oxide (NO) released from this salt terminates free radicals

102

present in lipid oxidation and provide the typical property for the cured meat29. There are many

103

NO-donating compounds such as nitrates and nitrites that have been used for several years in

104

curing and preserving meats, fish, and certain cheeses30, 31. Nitric oxide inhibits the growth of

105

wide varieties of bacteria (both gram positive and gram negative), viruses, fungi, and yeast32-34.

106

The biggest advantage of NO as an antimicrobial agent is its antimicrobial activity against

107

antibiotic-resistant strains35-37.

108

nitrosothiols in the packaging materials for food has not been yet studied. In this study, we

109

investigated the effects of incorporating the NO donor, S-Nitroso-N-acetylpenicillamine (SNAP)

110

into biodegradable nanocellulose-chitosan composite membranes for increased antimicrobial

111

activity for potential food packaging application.

112

Materials and Methods

However, incorporating NO donor compounds such as S-

113

Chitosan (85% deacetylated) derived from shrimp shell was purchased from Thermo- Fischer

114

(Waltham, MA USA), glacial acetic acid, glycerol, N-acetylpenicillamine, sulfuric acid,

115

hydrochloric acid, sodium nitrite, potassium chloride, sodium chloride, potassium phosphate 5 ACS Paragon Plus Environment


116

monobasic and sodium phosphate dibasic were purchased from Sigma-Aldrich (St. Louis, MO,

117

USA). Nanocellulose fibrils were bought from the University of Maine, MI. Luria broth (LB)-

118

Lennox and Luria Agar (LA) - Miller were obtained from Fisher Bioreagents (Fair Lawn, NJ).

119

Synthesis of S-Nitroso-N-acetyl-D-penicillamine (SNAP)

120

S-Nitroso- acetyl penicillamine was synthesized using a modified version of a previously

121

reported method by Clough and Thrush (1967). Equimolar ratios of N-acetylpenicillamine (NAP)

122

and sodium nitrite were added to a reaction vessel, which had 1:1 mixture of water and methanol

123

containing 2 M HCl and 2 M H2SO4, and stirred for 30 minutes. The reaction vessel was cooled

124

in an ice bath to precipitate the SNAP crystals. After precipitation of SNAP crystals, they were

125

collected by filtration and washed with water to remove unreacted salts, and air dried. The entire

126

process of SNAP synthesis was protected from light. The purity level of synthesized SNAP was

127

tested using the Sievers Chemiluminescence Nitric Oxide Analyzer and recorded greater than

128

95%.

129

Fabrication of composite membrane

130

Biodegradable antimicrobial packaging membranes were prepared in 2-layer and 3-layer

131

configurations. The 2-layer membranes contained one layer with 2 wt% SNAP (antimicrobial

132

agent) in nanocellulose-chitosan with a top layer of nanocellulose-chitosan mix without SNAP.

133

Similarly, the 3-layer membranes contained the middle layer with 2 wt% SNAP in

134

nanocellulose-chitosan with a top and bottom layers of nanocellulose-chitosan mix without

135

SNAP. The control membranes of 2-layer and 3-layer configurations were prepared separately

136

using nanocellulose-chitosan mix, without SNAP antimicrobial agent. About 2 wt % of chitosan

137

was completely dispersed in 100 mL of 0.1N acetic acid at room temperature (21±2oC) using

138

magnetic stirrer plate. In another beaker 2 wt% of nanocellulose fibrils (CNF) was thoroughly


Page 6 of 29

Page 7 of 29


139

dispersed in 100 mL of distilled (DI) water using magnetic stirrer plate. Completely dispersed

140

CNF and chitosan were combined together and mixed homogeneously; 3 mL of 80% glycerol

141

was added as a plasticizing agent while mixing them together. The resulting mixture was

142

degassed and poured into a clean glass petri dish of 14 cm diameter and air dried. While the

143

drying was incomplete, another set of membrane solution was made as mentioned above and

144

poured on the partly dried membrane as a second layer after 24 hours. On average it took 48

145

hours to dry for 2-layer control membrane. Similarly, 3-layer control membrane was also made

146

as 2-layer control membrane with additional layer of CNF-chitosan mix and additional drying

147

time of 24 h; in total approximately 72 h to complete the processing of 3-layer configuration.

148

To prepare NO-releasing antimicrobial membranes, 2 wt % of chitosan was completely

149

dispersed in 100 mL of 0.1N acetic acid as said above. 2 wt% SNAP was dissolved in 80%

150

ethanol and 3 mL of the resulting solution was added into the completely dispersed chitosan and

151

the mixing process was continued to obtain complete encapsulation of SNAP. In another beaker

152

2 wt% of nanocellulose fibrils (CNF) was thoroughly dispersed in 100 mL of distilled (DI) water

153

as mentioned in control membrane fabrication. Completely dispersed CNF and chitosan with

154

SNAP were then homogeneously mixed together; while mixing them, 3 mL of 80% glycerol was

155

added as a plasticizing agent. This mix was degassed before casting the membrane. The 2-layer

156

antimicrobial membranes were prepared by casting membrane without SNAP first and after 24

157

hours of drying, SNAP mixed chitosan and CNF homogeneous mix was poured on top of the

158

partially dried membrane of without SNAP and air dried completely. For 3-layer membranes, the

159

middle layer was made with SNAP and top and bottom were made without SNAP in an order

160

such as CNF-chitosan mix without SNAP first, CNF-chitosan mix with SNAP second and again

161

CNF-chitosan mix without SNAP third.



162

Physicochemical characterization

163

Water permeability

164

To determine water vapor permeability of the composite membranes the procedure followed

165

by Jaya and Das38 was used. Approximately 5 g of dehydrated silica gel was filled separately in 6

166

glass vials of uniform volume. The lid was replaced by one of the 6 membranes (2-layer with

167

SNAP, 3-layer with SNAP, 2-layer control, 3-layer control, control chitosan and control CNF).

168

All the vials were weighed and then placed in an environment maintained at 75% relative

169

humidity (RH) and 22±2o C established with saturated sodium chloride solution in a desiccator39.

170

The weight of each vial containing the silica gel was recorded at 24 h intervals for 7 days, and

171

the mean weight gained by the silica gel was calculated for each day. The water vapor

172

permeability, K (kg. m/ m2.day.Pa), of the composite membrane was calculated using the

173

following equation. 𝐾=

174

𝑑𝑤/𝑑𝜃𝑃 × 𝑡 𝐴𝑃 𝑝 ∗

175

where 𝑑𝑤/𝑑𝜃𝑃 is the slope of curve plotted between the time 𝜃𝑃 (day) and cumulative moisture

176

gain; w (kg) is the weight of the silica gel packed in the vials; t is the thickness of the film (m);

177

𝐴𝑃 (m2) is the surface area of the composite membranes; 𝑝∗ (Pa) is the saturation vapor pressure

178

of water at 22oC; the temperature of the environment chosen for the experiment and the relative

179

humidity (75%).

180

Tensile strength

181

Mechanical attributes of the composite membranes were characterized in terms of tensile

182

force using an Instron material testing machine (Instron model 5545, USA) with 1kN load cell.

183

Test specimens were cut according to the IPC-TM-650 standards with a 6:1 length to width ratio.

184

Gauge length and thickness values were recorded individually for each sample, and carefully 8 ACS Paragon Plus Environment

Page 8 of 29

Page 9 of 29


185

aligned to ensure minimal torsional forces were applied, and held by pneumatic jaws with 1”x1”

186

against 1”x3” rubber faces. Specimens were tested at a constant extension rate of the cross head

187

speed of 1 mm/s. The tests were done at 23 ± 2ºC and 50 ± 5% RH. Data points of force,

188

distance and time were collected and analyzed for stress and strain relationships. Young’s moduli

189

of the composite membranes were derived from the stress and strain relationships. Tensile

190

strength and Young’s modulus were then calculated for each sample and averaged for each

191

material. All materials were tested in triplicate.

192

Morphology study using scanning electron microscopy

193

Film surface morphology and microstructure were examined using scanning electron

194

microscopy (SEM) (FEI Inspect F FEG-SEM). Dried film samples were mounted on a metal stub

195

with double-sided carbon tape and sputter coated with 10 nm gold-palladium using a Leica EM

196

ACE200 sputter coater. Images were taken at accelerating voltage 20 kV and a magnification of

197

2000X.

198

NO release measurements

199

Nitric oxide release from the chitosan-nanocellulose composites were measured using a

200

Sievers Chemiluminescence Nitric Oxide Analyzer (NOA) model 280i (Boulder, CO). The NOA

201

has the ability to selectively measure NO through the reaction of NO with oxygen plasma, giving

202

it the ability to reduce interference from molecules such as nitrates and nitrites40. The ability of

203

NOA to selectively measure NO has made this technique a gold standard in the field of NO-

204

releasing materials41-43. Films were punched to 5/16’’ diameter and threaded with silk surgical

205

suture to be suspended in an amber NOA cell. The NOA cell with the membrane is lowered into

206

a 37oC water bath while the amber cell protects the sample from light. Deionized water (3 mL)

207

was added to the NOA cell and allowed to heat to 37°C. Nitrogen was bubbled into the DI at 100



Page 10 of 29

208

mL/min to provide a humid environment for the film. Both 2-layer and 3-layer membranes

209

containing SNAP were tested for initial release, as well as after 24-hour storage in humid 37°C

210

conditions in water jacketed incubator (Thermo Fisher Scientific, Waltham, MA USA). A

211

representation of the measurement cell is shown in Figure 1.

212

Zone of inhibition (ZOI) studies

213

Antibacterial properties of SNAP incorporated chitosan-nanocellulose based packaging

214

membranes were tested against three common bacterial strains using zone of inhibition (ZOI)

215

assay. The bacteria used in the study were Staphylococcus aureus (S. aureus), Listeria

216

monocytogenes (L. monocytogenes), and Enterococcus faecalis (E. faecalis).

217

version of agar diffusion standard protocol was followed to carry out this study aseptically44, 45.

218

A single isolated colony of each bacterium was suspended individually in Luria broth (LB)

219

medium and allowed to grow at 37ᴼC for 14 hours at a rotating speed of 150 rpm using a shaker

220

incubator. The optical density (OD) of the liquid suspension of each of the strains was measured

221

by UV-Vis spectrophotometer (Genesis 10S-Thermo Scientific) at 600 nm (OD600) using LB

222

medium as blank and was adjusted to 1x107 colony forming units per mL (CFUs/mL) based on

223

the calibration curve between CFUs and OD. A sterile swab was placed into the bacterial

224

culture, gently pressed and rotated against the inside of the petridish (14 cm) to spread the

225

bacteria uniformly and aseptically. The circular pieces (dia= 14 mm) of packaging membranes

226

(control and test) were placed over the bacterial culture and pressed gently. The resulting plates

227

with bacterial strain and membranes were incubated overnight at 37ᴼC for 20h. The diameters of

228

the ZOI of the membranes were compared with each other and among the bacteria strains to

229

evaluate the antimicrobial effectiveness of the membranes.

230


A modified

Page 11 of 29


231

Results and Discussion

232

Water vapor permeability characteristics analysis

233

Table 1 shows the water vapor permeability of the control and SNAP incorporated packaging

234

membranes developed in this study. Control membranes prepared with a single material such as

235

chitosan or CNF showed less water vapor permeability compared to the other membranes.

236

Chitosan and CNF combined control membranes (2-layer and 3-layer) had slightly higher

237

permeability than the membranes with single material even though their thickness is slightly

238

higher than the single material control membranes. In ideal polymeric structures, gas and vapor

239

permeability are independent of film thickness46. However, the result from chitosan and CNF

240

membrane showed that it behaves like an ideal polymer. It is possible that during the

241

permeability test, the side exposed to high relative humidity absorbed more water and developed

242

desorption rate independent of the thickness-resistance for water vapor diffusion. As a result of

243

this, the side exposed at low relative humidity became responsible for the vapor transfer. Under

244

this condition, the diffusion flux could become independent of thickness and resulted in higher

245

permeability than the single component control film47. SNAP incorporated membranes had

246

higher water vapor permeability than the membranes prepared without SNAP. Even though the

247

thickness of SNAP incorporated membranes with 2-layer and 3-layer were significantly higher

248

than other control membranes, they demonstrated the highest permeability indicating that the

249

membranes containing SNAP had a role in increasing the water vapor permeability. However,

250

the water permeability values obtained in this study were lower than the methyl cellulose based

251

biodegradable membranes developed by Turhan and Sahbaz48 and other starch-based

252

biodegradable films made by Para et al49 and Bertizzi et al47. The addition of SNAP to the

253

chitosan cellulose matrix likely decreases the attractive forces between the chain networks hence



254

increasing the free volume and segmental motions, which could result in easy diffusion of water

255

molecules and thereby increase the water vapor permeability.

256

Tensile strength analysis

Page 12 of 29

257

Figure 2 shows the Young’s modulus measured for control and NO-releasing membranes.

258

The mechanical strength of the membranes was studied by measuring their Young's modulus.

259

Since nanocellulose possess high mechanical strength, the membrane prepared with only

260

nanocellulose showed highest Young's modulus (1587.6 ± 282 MPa) as compared to the other

261

membranes. Chitosan is structurally similar to cellulose except it contains NH2 group in the

262

position of the C2 hydroxyl group and mechanical properties of chitosan vary depending on the

263

percentage of deacetylation50. Chitosan used in this study was 85% deacetylated and its Young’s

264

modulus was measured at 245.4 ± 89 MPa. The 2-layer and 3-layer control films showed higher

265

Young's modulus than control chitosan. As expected, chitosan and nanocellulose together

266

increased the mechanical strength due to increased hydrogen bonding between the polymer

267

chains of nanocellulose and chitosan51. However, incorporation of SNAP into the 2-layer and 3-

268

layer membranes reduced the mechanical strength much lower than the control chitosan films.

269

One of our previous studies showed similar reductions in strength upon incorporation of SNAP

270

into medical grade polymers, which can arise due to the solubility of the SNAP molecule within

271

the polymer matrix52. As the concentration of SNAP within the matrix surpasses the solubility

272

limit, localized regions of SNAP crystallization occur53. The localized crystalline SNAP might

273

create gaps between the nanocellulose network chains for its mobility and reduce inter-chain

274

interactions leading to significant reduction in tensile strength of the membrane. Similar to the

275

effect of SNAP on water vapor permeability, the addition of SNAP to the nanocellulose-chitosan


Page 13 of 29


276

matrix might decrease the attractive forces between the network chains and increase the free

277

volume and segmental motions, which could cause a reduction in mechanical strength as well.

278

NO release characteristics

279

Nitric oxide released from the 2-layer and-3-layer chitosan compositions were measured

280

using the Sieves Chemiluminescence Nitric Oxide Analyzer (model 280i, Boulder, CO). The

281

release of nitric oxide (NO) from SNAP is highly sensitive to heat, light (340 and 590 nm), and

282

moisture, as these catalyze the spontaneous decomposition reaction54, 55. The 2-layer and 3-layer

283

designs were implemented to see if the top layer of chitosan-nanocellulose would provide a

284

barrier to help selectively deliver NO to one side of the film. This selective release of NO would

285

be accomplished by limiting the exposure of the SNAP layer to both light and moisture.

286

However, no significant difference was observed between the 2 and 3-layer configurations (p =

287

0.36) as measured using a two-tailed Student's t-test. Release of NO from the chitosan-

288

nanocellulose composites were measured for initial release, as well as a release after 24 hours to

289

determine the level of NO that is being delivered during zone of inhibition studies (Figure 3). All

290

measurements were conducted at 37°C and the samples were protected from light at all times.

291

Initial release of NO from 2-layer and 3-layer composites were found to be 0.1±0.03x10-10

292

mol. cm-2. min-1 and 0.18 ± 0.07 x 10-10 mol. cm-2. min-1 respectively. In both cases, release of

293

NO decreased after 24 hours at 37°C to 0.07 ± 0.01x10-10 mol. cm-2. min-1 and 0.05 ± 0.01x10-10

294

mol. cm-2. min-1. While the NO release appears to be higher for the 3-layer configuration, it is

295

possible the NO release from the 2-layer configuration is asymmetric and is providing a larger

296

flux of NO to the exposed SNAP layer than that of the chitosan-nanocellulose layer. This could

297

result in an underestimation of the NO release.

298 13 ACS Paragon Plus Environment


299

Page 14 of 29

Antibacterial characteristics evaluation

300

Table 2 shows the zone of inhibition (ZOI) of each selected bacterium strain for both 2 and 3

301

layer membranes with NO-releasing (SNAP) component as an antimicrobial agent. The chitosan-

302

nanocellulose films with incorporated antimicrobial component resulted in the varying level of

303

NO release, which resulted in ZOI (mm) with varied diameters (Figure 4) depending on the level

304

of NO release. As expected all bacterial strains (S. aureus, L. monocytogenes, and E. faecalis)

305

were found susceptible to the packaging material owing to the bactericidal effect of NO. The

306

antimicrobial activity of the membranes resulted in similar ZOI between 2-layer and 3-layer

307

membranes against E. faecalis, and S. aureus. However, L. monocytogenes showed a significant

308

difference in the ZOI between the 2-layer and 3-layer membranes. Among all the bacteria, L.

309

monocytogenes was most susceptible to both the 3-layer and 2-layer membranes. Overall, S.

310

aurues exhibited the smallest ZOI (as compared to E. faecalis, and L. monocytogenes). The

311

higher antimicrobial activity of 3-layer membrane as compared to 2-layer membrane can directly

312

be correlated to the NO flux exhibited by these films. As shown in Figure 3, the 3-layer

313

membranes have higher NO flux in the beginning which might have resulted in higher bacteria

314

killing in the initial few hours. However, over an incubation period of 24 hours during ZOI

315

testing, the NO flux reached almost the same value for both 2-layer and 3-layer membranes

316

hence resulted in similar diameter of ZOI. The difference in the antimicrobial activity among the

317

bacterial strains could be attributed to their cell membrane properties56.

318

Morphology of membranes

319

Figure 5 shows the surface morphology of 2-layer and 3-layer control (A and B) membrane

320

and the membrane with SNAP material (C and D). Membranes were showed smooth surface

321

without any pores or cracks and with good structural integrity. The membranes obtained after


Page 15 of 29


322

drying were flat and compact. All of them show the nanocellulose fibrils network structure. It

323

could be assumed that within the fibrils network chitosan was smoothly dispersed, because

324

chitosan disperses within the nanocellulose matrix with relatively good interfacial adhesion

325

between the two components50. These results could be attributed to the strong interactions

326

between nanocellulose fibrils and chitosan and SNAP, which are caused by the hydrogen

327

bonding between the hydroxyl groups of nanocellulose and carbonyl group in the chitosan.

328

In conclusion, S-nitroso-N-acetylpenicillamine incorporated antimicrobial membranes mixed

329

with nanocellulose fibrils and chitosan were successfully fabricated. Developed membranes

330

exhibited good film forming properties due to the presence of high density of amino groups and

331

hydroxyl groups and inter and intramolecular hydrogen bonding. The chitosan-CNF-NO-

332

releasing composites showed antimicrobial characteristics in the packaging membranes. The

333

addition of chitosan and SNAP into nanocellulose to develop composite biodegradable

334

membrane with antimicrobial activity showed clear effects towards inhibition of E. faecalis,

335

S.aureus, and L.monocytogenes as shown using ZOI. The membranes developed in this study

336

showed excellent water barrier property with a low value of water vapor permeability. Surface

337

morphology showed the strong interactions between nanocellulose fibrils, chitosan, and SNAP

338

materials. Tensile strength measurements showed decreased Young’s modulus for SNAP

339

incorporated membranes, which would be further studied to improve its mechanical properties.

340

Acknowledgement

341 342

Authors acknowledge the Poultry processing research unit in US poultry research center at Athens, GA for proving the bacteria strains for this study.

343 344 15 ACS Paragon Plus Environment


345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355

Page 16 of 29

References (1) U.S. Department of Health and Human Services and U.S. Department of Agriculture, Dietary Guidelines for Americans, January 2005 (accessed on February 24th, 2016). (2) U.S. Department of Agriculture and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, "MyPyramid, April 2005 (accessed on February 24th, 2016). (3) U.S. Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service, U.S. per Capita Food Consumption of Fruits and Vegetables, 2005 (accessed on February 24th, 2016). (4) Produce Marketing Association, "Fresh-cut Produce Industry" fact sheet, 2006. See web site at http://www.pma.com/ (accessed on February 24th, 2016). (5) Mead, P.S.; Slutsker, L.; Dietz, C. 2000. Food-Related Illness and Death in the United States. J. Environ. Health. 2000, 62, 9-18.

356

(6) Allos, B.M.; Moore, M.R.; Griffin, P.M.; Tauxe, R.V. Surveillance for Sporadic

357

Foodborne Disease in the 21st Century: The Food-Net Perspective. Clin. Infect. Dis.

358

2004, 38(3), S115-120.

359

(7) Lampel, K.A.; Orlandi, P.A.; Kornegay, L. Improved Template Preparations for PCR-

360

Based Assays for Detection of Food-Borne Bacterial Pathogens. Appl. Environ.

361

Microbiol. 2000, 66(10), 4539-4542.

362

(8) Sivapalasingam, S.; Friedman, C.R.; Cohen, L.; Tauxe, R.V. Fresh Produce: A Growing

363

Cause of Outbreaks of Foodborne Illness in the United States, 1973 through 1997. J.

364

Food Prot. 2004, 67(10), 2342-2353.

365

(9) Tauxe, R.V. Emerging Foodborne Pathogens. Int. J. Food Microbiol. 2002, 78, 31-41.


Page 17 of 29

366


(10)

Trevejo, R.T; Courtney, J.G.; Starr, M.; Vugia, D.J. Epidemiology of

367

Salmonellosis In California, 1990–1999: Morbidity, Mortality, And Hospitalization

368

Costs. Am. J. Epidemiol. 2003,157:48-57.

369 370 371

(11)

Leceta,I.; Gurrero,P.; Ibarburu,I.; Dueñas,M.T.; Caba,K. Characterization And

Antimicrobial Analysis Of Chitosan-Based Films. J. Food Eng. 2013, 116, 889–899. (12)

Sung, S.Y.; Sin, L.T.; Tee, T.T.; Bee, S.T.; Rahmat, A.R.; Vikhraman, M.

372

Antimicrobial Agents for Food Packaging Applications. Trends. Food Sci. Technol.

373

2013, 33, 110–123.doi:10.1016/j.tifs.2013. 08.001

374 375 376

(13)

Türe, H.; Gallstedt, M.; Hedenqvist, M.K. Antimicrobial Compression- Molded

Wheat Gluten Films Containing Potassium Sorbate. Food Res. Int. 2012, 45, 109–115. (14)

Zhong, Y.; Song, X.; Li, Y. Antimicrobial, Physical And Mechanical Properties

377

Of Kudzu Starch–Chitosan Composite Films As A Function Of Acid Solvent Types.

378

Carbohydr. Polym. 2011, 84, 335–342.

379

(15)

Suppakul, P.; Miltz, J.; Sonneveld, K.; Bigger, S.W. Active Packaging

380

Technologies with an Emphasis on Antimicrobial Packaging and Its Applications. J.

381

Food. Sci. 2003, 68, 408–420.

382

(16)

Iwamoto, S., Abe, K.; Yano, H. The Effect of Hemicellulose on Wood Pulp

383

Nano-fibrillation and Nanofiber Network Characteristics. Biomacromolecules.

384

9:1022-1026.

385

(17)

2008,

Suryanegara, L.; Nakagaito, A.N.; Yano, H. The Effect of Crystallization of PLA

386

on the Thermal and Mechanical Properties of Micro-fibrillated Cellulose-Reinforced

387

PLA Composites. Compos. Sci. Technol. 2009, 69:1187–1192.



388

(18)

Nakagaito, A.N.; Fujimura, A.; Sakai, T.; Hama, Y.; Yano, H. Production of

389

Microfibrillated Cellulose (MFC)-Reinforced Polylactic Acid (PLA) Nanocomposites

390

From Stets Obtained By A Papermaking-Like Process. Comp. Sci. Techn. 2009, 69:1293–

391

1297.

392

(19)

Jonoobi, M.; Harun, J.; Mathew, A.P.; Oksman, K. Mechanical Properties of

393

Cellulose Nanofiber (CNF) Reinforced Polylactic Acid (PLA) Prepared By Twin Screw

394

Extrusion. Comp. Sci. Techn.. 2010, 70(12), 1742-1747.

395

(20)

George, j.; Ramana, K. V.; Sabapathy, S. N.; Bawa, A. S. Physicomechanical

396

Properties of Chemically Treated Bacterial (Acetobacter Xylinum) Cellulose Membrane.

397

World J. Microb. Biot. 2005, 21, 1323–1327.

398

(21)

Avik Khan.;, Tanzina Huq.; Ruhul A. Khan.; Bernard Riedl.; Monique Lacroix.

399

Nanocellulose-Based Composites and Bioactive Agents for Food Packaging. Crit. Rev.

400

Food Sci. Nutr. 2014, 54:163–174.

401

(22)

Dutta, P.K.; Shripra Tripathi; Mehrotra, G.K.; Joydeep Dutta. Perspectives for

402

Chitosan Based Antimicrobial Films in Food Applications. Food Chem. 2009, 114(4):

403

1173-1182.

404

(23)

Shripra Tripathi; Mehrotra, G.K.; Dutta, P.K. Physicochemical and Bioactivity of

405

Crosslinked Chitosan-PVA Film for Food Packaging Applications. Int. J. Biol.

406

Macromolec. 2009, 45: 372-376.

407

(24)

Page 18 of 29

Shripra Tripathi; Mehrotra, G.K.; Dutta, P.K. Preparation and Physicochemical

408

Evaluation of Chitosan/PVA/Pectin Ternary Film for Food Packaging Applications.

409

Carbohydr. Polym. 2009, 79: 711-716.


Page 19 of 29

410


(25)

Debeaufort, F.; Voilley, A. Lipid Based Edible Films and Coatings,” In Edible

411

Films and Coatings for Food Applications, M. E. Embuscado and K. C. Huber, Eds.,

412

2009, pp. 135–168, Springer, New York, NY, USA.

413

(26)

McHugh, T. H.; Avena-Bustillos, R. J. Applications Of Edible Films and

414

Coatings To Processed Foods,” In Edible Coatings And Films to Improve Food Quality,

415

E. A. Baldwin, R. Hagenmaier, and J. Bai, Eds., 2012, pp. 291–318, CRC Press, Boca

416

Raton, Fla, USA.

417

(27)

Soliva-Fortuny, R.; Rojas-Graii, M.A.; Martin-Belloso, O. Polysaccharide

418

Coatings,” In Edible Coatings and Films to Improve Food Quality, E. Baldwin, R.

419

Hagenmaier, and J. Bai, Eds., 2012, pp. 103–136, CRC Press, Boca Raton, Fla, USA.

420 421 422

(28)

Appendini, P.; Hotchkiss, J.H. Review of Antimicrobial Food Packaging.

Innovative Food Sci. Emerging. Technol. 2002, 3, 113–126. (29)

Miranda, K. M.; Espey, M. G.; Jourd'heuil, D.; Grisham, M. B.; Fukuto, J. M.;

423

Feelisch, M.; Wink, D. A. The Chemical Biology of Nitric Oxide. In Ignarro, L.J. (ed.),

424

Nitric Oxide: Biology and Pathobiology, Academic Press, San Diego, California, 2000,

425

pp. 41-55.

426

(30)

Cammack, R.; Joannou, C. L.; Cui, X. Y.; Martinez, C. T.; Maraj, S. R.; Hughes,

427

M. N. Nitrite And Nitrosyl Compounds in Food Preservation. Biochim. Biophys. Acta,

428

Bioenerg. 1999, 1411, 475-488.

429

(31)

Kanner, J.; Juven, B. J. S-Nitrosocysteine as an Antioxidant, Color-Developing,

430

Andanticlostridial Agent in Comminuted Turkey Meat. J. Food. Sci. 1980, 45, 1105-

431

1108, 1112.



432 433 434

(32)

De Groote, M. A.; Fang, F.C. NO Inhibitions: Antimicrobial Properties of Nitric

Oxide. Clin. Infect. Dis. 1995, 21 (2), S162-5. (33)

Jones, M.L.; Ganopolsky,J.G.; Labbé, A.; Wahl, C.; Prakash, S. Antimicrobial

435

Properties of Nitric Oxide and its Application in Antimicrobial Formulations and Medical

436

Devices. Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 2010, 88, 401–407.

437

(34)

Schairer, D.; Martinez, L.R.; Blecher, K.; Chouake, J.; Nacharaju, P.; Gialanella,

438

P.; Friedman, J.M.; Nosanchuk, J.D.; Friedman, A. J. Nitric Oxide Nanoparticles: Pre-

439

Clinical Utility as a Therapeutic For Intramuscular Abscesses. Virulence. 2012, 3, 62–67.

440

(35)

Nathan, C. Reactive Oxygen and Nitrogen Intermediates in the Relationship

441

between Mammalian Hosts and Microbial Pathogens. Proc Natl Acad .Sci. USA. 2000.

442

97, 8841-8.

443 444 445 446 447 448 449 450 451 452

Page 20 of 29

(36)

Privett, B. Examination of Bacterial Resistance to Exogenous Nitric Oxide. Nitric

Oxide. 2012. 26, 169-173. (37)

Friedman, A. Susceptibility of Gram-Positive and –Negative Bacteria to Novel

Nitric Oxide-Releasing Nanoparticles. Virulence. 2011. 3(6), 45-50. (38)

Jaya, S.; Das, H. Accelerated Storage, Shelf Life and Color of Mango Powder. J.

Food Process. Preserv. 2005, 29, 45–62. (39)

Labuza, T.P. Moisture Sorption: Practical Aspects of Isotherm Measurement and

Use. American Association of Cereal Chemists, 1984, Minnesota. (40)

Coneski, P.N; Schoenfisch, M.H. Nitric oxide release: part III. Measurement And

Reporting. Chem. Soc. Rev. 2012, 41, 3753-8.


Page 21 of 29

453


(41)

Brisbois, E.J.; Handa, H.; Major, T.C.; Bartlett, R.H.; Meyerhoff, M. E. Long-

454

Term Nitric Oxide Release and Elevated Temperature Stability with S-Nitroso-N-

455

Acetylpenicillamine (SNAP)-Doped Elast-Eon E2As Polymer. Biomaterials. 2013, 34,

456

6957-66.

457

(42)

Handa, H.; Brisbois, E.J.; Major, T.C.; Refahiyat, L.; Amoako, K.A.; Annich,

458

G.M. In Vitro and In Vivo Study of Sustained Nitric Oxide Release Coating Using a

459

Diazeniumdiolate-Doped Poly (Vinyl Chloride) Matrix with the Poly (Lactide-Co-

460

Glycolide) Additive. J. Mater. Chem. B. 2013, 1, 3578-87.

461

(43)

Handa, H.; Major, T.C.; Brisbois, E.J.; Amoako, K.A.; Meyerhoff, M.E.; Bartlett,

462

R.H. Hemocompatibility Comparison of Biomedical Grade Polymers Using Rabbit

463

Thrombogenicity Model For Preparing Nonthrombogenic Nitric Oxide Releasing

464

Surfaces. J. Mater. Chem. B. 2014, 2, 1059-67.

465

(44)

Ericsson, H.; Tunevall, G.; Wickman, W. The Paper Disc Method for

466

Determination of Bacterial Sensitivity to Antibiotics: Relationship between the Diameter

467

of the Zone of Inhibition and the Minimum Inhibitory Concentration. Scand. J. Clin. Lab.

468

Invest. 1960, 12(4), 414-422.

469 470 471

(45)

Rajni Singh; Astha Jain; Shikha Panwar;

Deepti Gupta;

Khare, S.K.

Antimicrobial Activity of some Natural Dyes. Dyes. Pigm. 2005, 66 (2), 99-102. (46)

Schwartzberg, H. G. Modeling of Gas and Vapor Transport through Hydrophilic

472

Films. In M. Mathlouthi (Ed.), Food packaging and preservation. Theory and practice,

473

1986, pp. 115–136. London: Elsevier Applied Science Pub.

474 475

(47)

Bertuzzi, M.A.; Castro Vidaurre, E.F.; Armada, M.; Gottifredi, J.C. Water Vapor

Permeability of Edible Starch Based Films. J. Food Eng. 2007, 80, 972–978



476

(48)

Page 22 of 29

Nazan Turhan, K.; Ferhunde Sahbaz. Water Vapor Permeability, Tensile

477

Properties and Solubility of Methylcellulose-Based Edible Films. J. Food Eng. 2004, 61,

478

459–466

479

(49)

Parraa, D.F.; Tadinib, C.C.; Poncea, P.; Luga˜o. A.B. Mechanical Properties and

480

Water Vapor Transmission in Some Blends of Cassava Starch Edible Films. Carbohydr.

481

Polym. 2004, 58, 475–481

482

(50)

Wenling, C.; Duohui, J.; Jiamou, L.; Yandao, G.; Nanming, Z.; Xiufang, Z.

483

Effects of the Degree of Deacetylation on the Physicochemical Properties and Schwann

484

Cell Affinity of Chitosan Films. J. Biomater. Appl. 2005, 20(2), 157-77.

485

(51)

Li, Z.; Zhuang, X. P.; Liu, X. F.; Guan, Y. L.; Yao, K. D. Study on Antibacterial

486

O-Carboxymethylated

487

Dimethylacetamide Solution. Polymer. 2002, 43, 1541-1547.

488

(52)

Chitosan/Cellulose

Blend

Film

from

Licl/N,

N-

Goudie, M.J.; Brisbois, E.J.; Pant, J.; Thompson, A.; Potkay, J.A.; Handa, H.

489

Characterization of an S-Nitroso-N-Acetylpenicillamine-Based Nitric Oxide Releasing

490

Polymer from a Translational Perspective. Int. J. Polym. Mater. Biomater. 2016, Article

491

in press.

492

(53)

Wo, Yaqi. Origin of Long-Term Storage Stability And Nitric Oxide Release

493

Behavior of Carbosil Polymer Doped with S-Nitroso-N-Acetyl-D-Penicillamine. ACS

494

Appl. Mater. Interfaces. 2015, 40(7), 22218-22227.

495 496

(54)

Lyn H á Williams, D. Identification of Cu+ as the Effective Reagent in Nitric

Oxide Formation from S-Nitrosothiols (RSNO). J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1996, 2 (4), 481-487.


Page 23 of 29

515


(55)

Frost, Megan C.; Mark E. Meyerhoff. Controlled Photo initiated Release of Nitric

516

Oxide

517

Derivatized Fumed Silica Filler. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2004, 126(5), 1348-1349.

518 519

(56)

from

Polymer

Films

Containing

S-Nitroso-N-Acetyl-DL-Penicillamine

Hervé Roy. Tuning the Properties of the Bacterial Membrane with Aminoacylated

Phosphatidyl Glycerol. IUBMB Life. 2009, 61(10), 940–953.

520 521 522 523 524 525 526 527 528 Nitrogen Bubble flow

Suspension of NO releasing film

Nitrogen Sweep flow

NO rich gas to NOA

Water bath (37°C)

529 23 ACS Paragon Plus Environment


Page 24 of 29

530

Figure 1 Representation of test configuration for NOA cell for measurement of NO released

531

from chitosan films in a humid environment

532 533 534 535 2000 1800 1600

Modulus (MPa)

1400 1200 1000 800 600 400 200 0 2 layer control 3 layer control

2 layer NO

3 layer NO

536 537

Cellulose control

Figure 2 Young’s modulus of nanocellulose-chitosan membranes.

538 539 540 541 542 543 24 ACS Paragon Plus Environment

Chitosan control

Page 25 of 29


544 545 0.30

NO flux (x10-10 mol cm-2 min-1)

0.25

0.20

0.15

0.10

0.05

0.00

546

Chitosan 2 Layer (Initial)

Chitosan 3 Layer (Initial)

Chitosan 2 Layer (24 h)

Chitosan 3 Layer (24 h)

547

Figure 3 Nitric oxide release rates of 2-layer and 3-layer chitosan-nanocellulose composites as

548

measured by chemiluminescence

549 550 551 552 553 554



555 556

Figure 4 Images of the zone of inhibition comparison of 2-layer chitosan-CNF control, 2-layer

557

SNAP incorporated chitosan-CNF film, 3-layer SNAP incorporated chitosan-CNF film and 3-

558

layer control (clockwise from top left) for (A) Listeria monocytogenes (B) Staphylococcus

559

aureus (C) Enterococcus faecalis.

560 561 562 563 564 565


Page 26 of 29

Page 27 of 29


566 567

Figure 5 Scanning electron microscope images of the chitosan-nanocellulose film before and

568

after addition of SNAP. A) 3-layer chitosan-nanocellulose, B) 2-layer chitosan-nanocellulose,

569

C) 3-layer chitosan-nanocellulose with SNAP, and D) 2-layer chitosan-nanocellulose with

570

SNAP.

571 572 573 574 575 576 577 578 579 580 581 27 ACS Paragon Plus Environment


582

Page 28 of 29

Table 1. Water permeability of different types of packaging membranes Membrane type

Water vapor permeability Membrane (kg.m/ m2.day.Pa)

thickness (mm)

Chitosan

7.01x10-6

0.058

Nano Cellulose Fibrils (CNF)

6.88x10-6

0.060

2-layer CNF + Chitosan with SNAP

1.56x10-5

0.126

2-layer CNF +Chitosan without SNAP

8.81x10-6

0.068

3-layer CNF + Chitosan with SNAP

1.11x10-5

0.124

3-layer CNF + Chitosan without SNAP

8.31x10-6

0.096

583 584

Table 2. Comparative analysis of zone of inhibition among different bacterial strains using

585

developed antimicrobial packaging membranes Film type

Bacterial strain

ZOI (mm)

2-layer SNAP incorporated chitosan-CNF films

S. aureus

30


S. aureus

30


E. faecalis

34


E. faecalis

35


L. monocytogenes

37


L. monocytogenes

45

586 587 588 589


Page 29 of 29

590


Abstract Graphics

591 592

For table of contents only


Antimicrobial and Physicochemical Characterization of

Recommend Documents