Subscriber access provided by UNIVERSITY OF THE SUNSHINE COAST
Article
Tunable physical properties of ethylcellulose/ gelatin composite nanofibers by electrospinning Yuyu Liu, Lingli Deng, Cen Zhang, Fengqin Feng, and Hui Zhang J. Agric. Food Chem., Just Accepted Manuscript • DOI: 10.1021/acs.jafc.7b06038 • Publication Date (Web): 09 Feb 2018 Downloaded from http://pubs.acs.org on February 13, 2018
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 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 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 37
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry
1
Tunable physical properties of ethylcellulose/gelatin composite nanofibers
2
by electrospinning
3 4
Yuyu Liu, Lingli Deng, Cen Zhang, Fengqin Feng, Hui Zhang *
5 6
College of Biosystems Engineering and Food Science, Fuli Institute of Food Science, Zhejiang Key
7
Laboratory for Agro-Food Processing, Zhejiang R&D Center for Food Technology and Equipment,
8
Zhejiang University, Hangzhou 310058, China
9 10
* Corresponding author. E-mail:
[email protected]. Telephone: +86-571-88982981; fax:
11
+86-571-88982981.
12
1
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry
13
Abstract
14
In this work, the ethylcellulose/gelatin blends at various weight ratios in water/ethanol/acetic
15
acid solution were electrospun to fabricate nanofibers with tunable physical properties. The
16
solution compatibility was predicted based on Hansen solubility parameters and evaluated by
17
rheological measurements. The physical properties were characterized by scanning electron
18
microscopy, porosity, differential scanning calorimetry, thermogravimetry, Fourier transform
19
infrared spectroscopy, and water contact angle. Results showed that the entangled structures
20
among ethylcellulose and gelatin chains through hydrogen bonds gave rise to a fine morphology of
21
the composite fibers with improved thermal stability. The fibers with higher gelatin ratio (75%)
22
possessed hydrophilic surface (water contact angle of 53.5°) and adequate water uptake ability
23
(1234.14%), while the fibers with higher ethylcellulose proportion (75%) tended to be highly
24
water stable with a hydrophobic surface (water contact angle of 129.7°). This work suggested that
25
the composite ethylcellulose/gelatin nanofibers with tunable physical properties have potentials as
26
materials for bioactive encapsulation, food packaging and filtration applications.
27 28
Keywords
29
Ethylcellulose, gelatin, electrospinning, compatibility, physical property
30
2
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Page 2 of 37
Page 3 of 37
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry
31
Introduction
32
Electrospinning is the technique of using high potential electric field to disintegrate polymer
33
solution into fine fibers.1 This technique involves the use of high-voltage source, a capillary, a pump
34
and a grounded collector. During electrospinning, polymer solution is constantly extruded from a
35
capillary by a pump, forming a charged cone-shaped droplet known as the Taylor cone caused by
36
high-voltage. Two main forces fight on the charged droplet, one is a drag force called electrostatic
37
force, and the other is the surface tension, leading to contraction of the droplet. Once the drag force
38
counteracts the surface tension, a charged polymer jet is ejected from the Taylor cone and is
39
transited toward collector. During the transit, the jet suffers from distortion, expansion and solvent
40
evaporation, leading to thin fibers with diameters ranging from micrometers to nanometers.2, 3 The
41
fabricated thin fibers usually possess fascinating features such as high porosity, high
42
surface-to-volume ratio, and ultrafine structures.4-7 These unique properties make the electrospun
43
fibers an ideal candidate for active food packaging, edible coatings, encapsulation, biomedicine, and
44
filtration membranes.3, 6, 8
45
As a FDA approved biopolymer with excellent biodegradability, biocompatibility and
46
non-immunogenicity, gelatin has been electrospun for biomedical applications involving tissue
47
scaffolds, wound healing and health caring devices.6, 9 However, the extremely water instability and
48
thermo-sensitivity of gelatin nanofibers have significantly limited the utilization in food packaging
49
and encapsulation of temperature-sensitive components.8 Hence, a few reports have suggested
50
blending or cross-linking gelatin with other materials, such as cellulose or its derivatives.10, 11
51
Ethylcellulose, as one of cellulose derivatives, is a perfect candidate as blending material due
52
to its nontoxicity, hydrophobicity, high flexibility, thermoplasticity and film forming ability, 3
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry
Page 4 of 37
53
exhibiting various applications in food, microencapsulation, filtration and pharmaceutics.12,
13
54
Zhang et al. found that the casted film of ethylcellulose blended with poly(propylene carbonate)
55
exhibited an enhanced thermal decomposition temperature due to the contribution of thermoplastic
56
ethylcellulose.14 The improved water stability of zein fibers by co-electrospinning with
57
ethylcellulose was reported by Lu et al., who showed that the composite nanofibers possessed a
58
favored sustained hydrophobic drug release profile.15
59
It has been reported that good solution compatibility contributes to improved spinnability,
60
leading to excellent morphology and regular shape of fibers.16, 17 Thus, before electrospinning, a
61
prediction of the polymer compatibility in solution is necessary. The Hansen solubility parameters
62
(HSPs), involving three components of dispersive (δd), polar (δp) and hydrogen bonding (δh)
63
energies, have been confirmed as a promising method for calculation of solution compatibility.
64
Wang et al. suggested that the HSPs were more precise to interpret dispersion behavior of
65
nanoparticles in solvents than qualitative descriptions.18 The HSPs may serve as tools to develop
66
polymeric adhesives,19 interpenetrating polymer networks,20 and polymerization reactions.21 The
67
total HSP value (δt) is defined as the square root of the sum of the three squared components as
68
follows:18 δ = δ + δ + δ (1)
69
In this study, the ethylcellulose/gelatin composite nanofibers at various weight ratios were
70
fabricated by electrospinning. The solution compatibility was predicted based on HSPs calculations,
71
and evaluated by viscosity measurements. The characterization of the electrospun nanofibers was
72
conducted using scanning electron microscopy (SEM), thermogravimetric analysis (TGA),
73
differential scanning calorimetry (DSC), Fourier transform infrared (FTIR) spectroscopy, water 4
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Page 5 of 37
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry
74
contact angle (WCA), porosity and water vapor transmission rate. The nanofibers were then
75
immersed in water to investigate the properties of surface swelling, water uptake, and weight loss.
76
Materials and Methods
77
Materials. Ethylcellulose (3 - 7 cP, MW, 20 - 30 kDa) and gelatin (Type B, Bloom 250, MW,
78
100 kDa) were obtained from Aladdin, Inc. (Shanghai, China). Ethanol absolute and acetic acid
79
(99.8%) were purchased from Sinopharm Chemical Reagent Co., Ltd., China. Deionized water was
80
used throughout the experiments. All materials were used without further purification.
81
Solution Preparation. The solvent volume ratio of water/ethanol/acetic acid was set to 2/2/6
82
(v/v/v). Blends of ethylcellulose and gelatin at weight ratios of 0/1, 1/3, 1/1, 3/1 and 1/0 (denoted as
83
EG01, EG13, EG11, EG31 and EG10, respectively) were dissolved in the solvent solution at a total
84
concentration of 30 wt% (w/v). The solutions were constantly stirred at a room temperature of
85
25 °C to ensure complete dissolution of polymers.
86
Rheology. The rheological measurements were performed at 25 °C using an Anton Paar
87
MCR302 rheometer (Anton Paar, Austria, QC) across a shear rate range of 1 - 100 s−1 using 1%
88
strain. The zero shear viscosity was taken as the average viscosity obtained at a shear rate occurred
89
at 1 s−1.
90
Electrospinning. The laboratorial electrospinning equipment consisted of a high-voltage
91
power supply (Gamma High Voltage, USA), a syringe connected with a pump (LSP02-1B, Baoding
92
Longer Precision Pump Co., Ltd., China), and a grounded collector. Electrospinning parameters of
93
all solutions were set as follows: an applied voltage of 15 kV, a feed rate of 1.0 mL/h, and a
94
tip-to-collector distance of 100 mm. 4 ml of the prepared solutions was electrospun onto a grounded
95
cylindrical aluminum foil at room temperature with a humidity of 50%. The collected nanofibers 5
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry
96
were then stored in a desiccator to remove the residual solvents before characterization.
97
Fiber Morphology. The fiber morphology was observed using a field emission scanning
98
electron microscope (SEM, SU8010, Hitachi, Japan). The fiber diameters from SEM images were
99
measured by Nano Measure software. The average diameter and size distribution of fibers were
100
calculated by measuring 120 fibers at random.
101
Porosity. The porosity of fibers was determined by the previously reported method with
102
modifications.22, 23 Three specimens for each fiber mat were tested. Here, the specimens were cut
103
into round pieces with a diameter of 15 mm and weighted. The thickness at minimum three different
104
places was measured using a thickness meter (C640, Labthink, China). The appear density (ρA) was
105
the mass to volume ratio of the mat, while the real density (ρR) was determined on the basis of
106
gelatin density (1.41 g/cm3) and ethylcellulose density (1.14 g/cm3) by mass fraction. The equation
107
used to determine the porosity was as follows: porosity = 1 −
ρ × 100% (2) ρ
108
Thermal Behaviors. The thermal behaviors were investigated using differential scanning
109
calorimetry (DSC,TA-Q500, USA) and thermogravimetric analysis (TGA, TA-Q500, USA). For
110
TGA analysis, the samples (2 - 3 mg) were heated from 50 °C to 600 °C at a rate of 10 °C/min
111
under a dynamic nitrogen atmosphere. For DSC analysis, the samples (6 - 8 mg) were heated from 0
112
- 250 °C at 10 °C/min under a nitrogen atmosphere at a flow rate of 50 mL/min.
113
Fourier Transform Infrared Spectroscopy. The nanofiber mats were evaluated using a
114
Fourier Transform Infrared Spectrometer (FTIR, Nicolet 170-SX, Thermo Nicolet Ltd., USA). The
115
spectra were recorded with 16 scans at a resolution of 4 cm−1 in the range of 4000 - 400 cm−1.
116
Water Contact Angle. The water contact angle (WCA) was conducted at room temperature 6
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Page 6 of 37
Page 7 of 37
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry
117
using a surface tension meter (DCAT-21, Delta Phase, Germany) with Milli-Q water (3 µL) as the
118
probe liquid. The equilibration time of the droplet was 15 s.
119
Water Evaporation. The water vapor transmission rate (WVTR) was determined with a Water
120
Vapor Transmission Rate Tester (W3/30, Labthink, China) at 25 °C with 80% relative humidity. All
121
measurements were performed in triplicate.
122
Water Stability. The fiber mats were cut into round piece with a diameter of 15 mm (D0) and
123
weighted (W0), and then immersed in water for 10 days at room temperature with a shaking speed at
124
150 rmp. During the immersion, water was added to maintain a constant volume after withdrawing
125
aliquots from the solution for quantitative analysis using a BCA protein assay kit (Pierce, Rockford,
126
IL) and a microplate reader (MDS ANALYTICAL, America). The pure ethylcellulose (EG10) fiber
127
sample was used as control. The gelatin weight loss (GL) was calculated using the following
128
equation: G,! =
M!# ⁄M! ( × 100% (3) M&' Φ! × M&'
129
Where Mi and Mit represent the original mat weight and the gelatin mass loss at the t time for
130
the sample numbered for i, respectively; M01 and M01∞ are the original mass and the terminal gelatin
131
mass loss of the EG01 sample, respectively; Φi represents the gelatin fraction of each sample
132
compared with the EG01 sample.
133
After 10 days immersion, digital photographs were taken to measure diameter (DT) using Nano
134
Measure software, the wet weight of the samples (Ww) was immediately measured. Then samples
135
were dried at 60 °C for 2 hours and their weights were recorded (WD). The samples were stored in a
136
desiccator prior to SEM examinations. The surface welling (SW), water-uptake capacity (WT), and
137
weight loss (WL) were calculated as follows:24-26 7
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry
D D π × (( 2. ) − ( 2& ) ) S+ = (4) D π × ( & ) 2 W1 − W2 W. = (5) W2 W& − W2 W = × 100% (6) W& 138
Statistical Analysis. The data were presented as mean ± standard deviation of three different
139
measurements. The statistical analysis was carried out using analysis of variance at the 0.05
140
significance level. All the plots were analyzed using Origin pro8 software.
141
Results and discussion
142
Solution Compatibility. The Hansen solubility parameters (HSPs), split into dispersive (δd),
143
polar (δp) and hydrogen bonding (δh) energies, is commonly used for the prediction of solution
144
compatibility. The total HSP value (δt) is defined as the square root of the sum of the three squared
145
components. The closer the HSPs values of two species are, the greater their compatibility is, as
146
calculated below:21, 27, 28 (R 6 ) = 4 × (δ2 − δ2' ) + (δ7 − δ7' ) + (δ8 − δ8' ) (7)
147 148
The concept has been extended from the mixing of polymers with liquid with a total HSPs defined as follows:29 δ:!; = < ∅! δ#,! (8)
149
Where Φ represents the volume (weight) ratio of each solvent or polymer in solution.
150
The published HSPs of the used solvents and polymers in this work were presented in Table 1
151
(A), and the calculated difference in HSPs between polymers and solvents was shown in Table 1 (B).
152
Based on this theory, blending ethylcellulose with gelatin in the water/ethanol/acetic acid solution
153
gave rise to smaller Ra compared with the pure ethylcellulose or gelatin solution, suggesting 8
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Page 8 of 37
Page 9 of 37
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry
154
improved compatibility of the composite. Interestingly, a minimum Ra occurred in the case of EG11,
155
indicating the highest compatibility of the ethylcellulose/gelatin mixture in solution. Gravelle et al.
156
reported that for a polymer gel network based on hydrogen bonds such as ethylcellulose-based
157
systems, the δh played a decisive role in determining solution compatibility.27 Hence, the higher |δh|
158
of the EG31 solution might imply a weaker compatibility, compared with the EG13 or EG11
159
solution.
160
It is universally accepted that the viscosity of solution was another reliable and desirable
161
method to decide solution compatibility for a ternary (polymer-polymer-solvent) system.16 The
162
viscosity measurements have been applied to confirm the availability of the HSPs in prediction of
163
solution compatibility.30 Thus, the rheological experiments were performed and the results were
164
presented in Table 1 (B). The apparent viscosities of the EG01, EG13, EG11, EG31 and EG10
165
solutions were 2.51, 6.74, 5.24, 13.40 and 8.53 Pa·s, respectively. When the weight ratio of
166
ethylcellulose content was less than 50%, the viscosity of the blend was higher than that of the
167
gelatin solution and lower than that of the ethylcellulose solution, indicating good compatibility on
168
blending.16 Further, a minimum viscosity was obtained when increasing the ethylcellulose ratio up
169
to 50%, indicating the enhanced solution compatibility due to the reduced intramolecular and
170
intermolecular forces of gelatin, and the increased entanglements among ethylcellulose and gelatin.
171
Ge
172
(PBMA)/polyacrylonitrile (PAN) systems with increasing PBMA content suggested good
173
compatible, due to the fact that the entry of PBMA molecules within the PAN threw apart the
174
regularly arranged chains of PAN and broke up the molecular alignment to a certain extent.20
175
However, when the weight ratio of ethylcellulose was 75%, the viscosity of the blend was higher
et
al.
reported
that
the
reduced
viscosity
of
9
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
the
poly(n-butyl
methacrylate)
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry
176
than that of the ethylcellulose or gelatin solution due to the decreased flexibility of gelatin chains
177
caused by ethylcellulose with poor fluidity, indicating poor solution compatibility. Therefore, these
178
results suggested that the best solution compatibility was for EG11, while the weakest for EG31, in
179
good agreement with the HSPs prediction.
180
Fiber Morphology. The morphology of the ethylcellulose/gelatin composite fibers was
181
displayed in Figure 1. Visually, the fiber mats appeared to be white-colored with film-like structures,
182
while the SEM images showed a highly-porous structure due to the randomly-oriented and
183
interlocking fibers. The pure gelatin (EG01) fibers were homogeneous with an average diameter of
184
653.5 nm, while the pure ethylcellulose (EG10) fibers were spindle-like structures with an average
185
diameter of 412.9 nm. The composite fibers (EG13, EG11 and EG31) had regular morphologies at
186
average diameters of 550.0, 459.2 and 560.4 nm, respectively. Notably, the EG11 fibers were the
187
most uniform and thinnest. This is in agreement with the results of Atila et al., who found that the
188
most homogeneous fiber morphology was obtained at pullulan/cellulose acetate at a weight ratio of
189
1/1, while the other weight ratios resulted in phase separation preventing uniformity of fibers.25
190
Ghorani et al. demonstrated that the increased inter-chain interactions served to stabilize the
191
physical entanglements leading to enhanced compatibility, resulting in a bead-free morphology with
192
improved spinnability.1, 31 Chang et al. reported that the bacteria cellulose/gelatin composite films
193
provided an interpenetrating network, in which bacteria cellulose supported as scaffold with gelatin
194
filled in through hydrogen bonds.11 Therefore, the spindle-free morphology after blending
195
ethylcellulose with gelatin might be due to the increased solution compatibility caused by the
196
intermolecular interactions such as hydrogen bonds among the molecular chains between gelatin
197
and ethylcellulose. Chen et al. reported that good compatibility between polyamide 6 (PA6) and 10
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Page 10 of 37
Page 11 of 37
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry
198
polyethylene glycol (PEG) improved the spinnability of electrospinning, leading to uniform fibers
199
with regular shape.17 Additionally, the fiber size reduction led to a high specific surface area,
200
suggesting attractive values for encapsulation of bioactive compounds, bimolecular sensors and
201
ultra-filtration media.1
202
Porosity. Corresponding to the SEM images in Figure 1, the porosity of the EG01, EG13,
203
EG11, EG31 and EG10 fibers was 86.81%, 91.74%, 92.46%, 90.18% and 92.28%, respectively
204
(Figure 2). This suggested that the thicker the fibers, the lower the porosity value. Yoon et al.
205
observed that for the electrospun fibers, the thinnest fibers exhibited the highest porosity value.32 It
206
is generally accepted that a high bulk porosity (up to 80%) encouraged adequate diffusion of
207
nutrition, vapor and waste transport, desirable for many applications involving filtration, sensors
208
and biological substrates.23,
209
terephthalate) nanofibers as filtration membrane for apple juice clarification, due to the distinct
210
characteristics such as high porosity and large surface area.34
32, 33
Veleirinho et al. reported an application of poly(ethylene
211
Thermal Behaviors. The TGA behaviors of the electrospun fibers given in Figure 3 (A) and
212
Table 2 (A) were divided into three stages. The first stage at a temperature range of 0 - 160 °C was
213
related to the loss of volatile components by evaporation.35 It was clear that the increase in
214
ethylcellulose content resulted in the reduced mass loss of nanofibers. In the second stage at 160 -
215
380 °C, the thermal events were most possibly associated with the decomposition of molecular
216
chains.36 The decomposition temperatures of the pure gelatin (EG01) and ethylcellulose (EG10)
217
fibers were 311.82 °C and 349.18 °C, respectively. However, the decomposition temperatures of the
218
EG13, EG11 and EG31 fibers were 353.01, 355.16 and 352.41 °C, respectively, indicating the
219
improved thermal decomposition stability of the composite fibers. This is in agreement with the 11
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry
Page 12 of 37
220
results reported by Zhang et al., who demonstrated an elevated thermal decomposition temperature
221
upon blending ethylcellulose with poly(propylene carbonate).14 The third (T > 380 °C) stage was
222
attributed to the carbonation reactions.37
223
The DSC results were shown in Figure 3 (B) and Table 2 (B). The broad endothermic peak, due
224
to evaporation of volatiles or bound water, was termed as dehydration event (ED). The ED of the
225
EG13, EG11 and EG31 fibers appeared at 127.22, 112.40 and 107.70 °C , respectively,38 indicating
226
that the higher the ethylcellulose content, the less pronounced ED of the composite fibers. The glass
227
transition temperature of the EG10 fibers at 123.47 °C was followed by a melting temperature at
228
190.05 °C, suggesting a semi-crystallite behavior of ethylcellullose, in agreement with the previous
229
studies reporting presence of an ‘‘ordered’’ crystallite and a ‘‘disordered’’ amorphous areas in
230
ethylcellulose.13 The characteristic melting peaks of the EG01 fibers at 60.31 °C and 213.34 °C
231
were known as the denaturation and decomposition events, respectively.35,
232
composite fibers, the characteristic glass transition event was not observed, while the melting peaks
233
shifted to higher temperatures, especially for the EG11 fibers with the highest temperatures at
234
66.10 °C and 218.35 °C, respectively. Davidovich et al. reported that the disappeared glass
235
transition was related to the disorder/order transition of ethylcellulose caused by the rearrangement
236
of inter-molecular network through intra-chain hydrogen bonds.13 Gravelle et al. ascribed the shift
237
in the melting peak to the direct inter-chain interactions between composite systems, and suggested
238
that the stronger the interactions, the more the peak-shifts.27 Jiang et al. argued that the molecular
239
chains entangled between polycaprolactone and gelatin resulted in the increased melting
240
temperatures of composite fibers compared with the pure polycaprolactone fibers.38 Therefore, our
241
results indicated that blending ethylcellulose with gelatin in nanofibers has encouraged 12
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
39
As for all the
Page 13 of 37
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry
242
inter-molecular interactions leading to the improved thermal stability.
243
FTIR. The FTIR analysis of the electrospun nanofibers was illustrated in Figure 4. The
244
characteristic absorption peaks of gelatin were related to C=O stretching at 1635 - 1650 cm−1
245
(amide I), N-H bending at 1539 cm−1 (amide II) and C-N stretching at 1243 cm−1 (amide III),
246
respectively 40. The band between 3600 - 3200 cm−1 was due to -OH stretching.11, 41 Compared with
247
the pure gelatin (EG01) fibers, the EG13, EG11 and EG31 composite fibers showed the decreased
248
intensities of the amide I and II bands, as well as an almost nonexistent amide III for EG11 and
249
EG31 fibers. Additionally, the -OH stretching of the EG01 and EG10 fibers at 3303 and 3474 cm−1
250
was shifted to 3330, 3381 and 3463 cm−1 in the case of the EG13, EG11 and EG31 fibers,
251
respectively.
252
It is known that the decreased intensities of amide bands are associated with the decreased
253
helical conformation of gelatin chains, and the wavenumber shifts of the -OH bands are a measure
254
of the average strength of the intra- and inter-molecular hydrogen bonds.9,
255
observed changes in peak intensity and peak-shifts evidenced the occurrence of hydrogen bonds
256
among ethylcellulose and gelatin chains in nanofibers.
40
Therefore, the
257
Water Contact Angle. The results of surface wettability characterized by water contact angle
258
(WCA) were presented in Figure 5. The pure gelatin (EG01) fibers had a WCA of 38.5° due to its
259
extreme water instability.42 As a water stable material,15 the pure ethylcellulose (EG10) fibers
260
showed a hydrophobic surface (WCA = 134.8°). In the case of the EG13 fibers, a hydrophilic
261
surface at 53.5° was observed, while the EG11 and EG31 fibers gave WCA of 113.8° and 129.7°,
262
respectively, suggesting the hydrophobic surface. These results demonstrated that the increase in
263
gelatin content caused the significant decrease in WCA, in agreement with the previous results for 13
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry
264
the gelatin based composite films, indicating that the higher the gelatin content, the higher the
265
surface wettability.43 It is accepted that the hydrophilic fiber surface was usually favored for
266
aqueous filtration applications due to the reduced protein adhesion and bio-fouling, while the
267
surface hydrophobicity contributed to water stability.15, 44
268
Water Evaporation. As presented in Figure 6, the water vapor transition rates (WVTR) of the
269
pure gelatin (EG01) and composite (EG13, EG11 and EG31) fibers were 530.62, 534.11, 544.58
270
and 499.20 g/m2·24 h, respectively, lower than that of the pure ethylcellulose (EG10) fibers (576.00
271
g/m2·24 h). Similarly, it was reported that the WVTR of the casted bacterial cellulose/gelatin films
272
ranging from 592 to 885 g/m2·24 h at different gelatin contents were lower than the pure bacterial
273
cellulose film (1026 g/m2·24).9 The differences in fiber porosity and fiber diameter might gave an
274
explanation to the changes in WVTR, the higher porosity and smaller fiber diameter were more in
275
favor of the increase in WVTR. Additionally, the coefficients of vapor permeability (WVPC) of
276
each fibers were 8.41 × 10-12, 1.10 × 10-11, 1.00 × 10-11, 4.65 ×10-12 and 4.15 ×10-12 g·cm/cm2·s·Pa
277
at the ethylcellulose/gelatin weight ratio of 0/1, 1/3, 1/1, 3/1 and 1/0, respectively. Obviously,
278
increasing the gelatin content in the composite fibers caused an increase in WVPC. Similarly,
279
Soradech et al. observed that for the shellac/gelatin composite films, the higher the gelatin content,
280
the higher WVPC was obtained, due to a greater amino content of gelatin, resulting in the higher
281
absorption of water molecules.43 In general, WVTR and WVPC parameters were correlated to
282
moisture retention and gas and fluid exchange.26
283
Water Stability. The SEM images of the electrospun fibers after immersed in water for 10 days
284
were shown in Figure 7, and the calculated surface swelling (SW), water-uptake capacity (WT) and
285
weight loss (WL) were presented in Table 3. After immersion, the pure gelatin (EG01) fibers were 14
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Page 14 of 37
Page 15 of 37
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry
286
completely dissolved, confirming its water instability. With the increasing ethylcellulose content, a
287
swelled and attached fiber surface was observed for the EG13 and EG11 fibers, while the EG31 and
288
EG10 fibers maintained the fibrous morphology, indicating a superior water stability contributed by
289
ethylcellulose. In Table 3, the negative values of SW were due to the size shrinkage of the fiber mats
290
after water immersion. With the increasing ethylcellulose content, the lower extent of shrinkage was
291
obtained. Similarly, the WL measurements reflected that the higher the ethylcellulose content, the
292
smaller the WL value. These results suggested that the composite fibers with higher ethylcellulose
293
content were more water stable since they were indicators of the dislocations or blistering and
294
sensitivity to water.26, 43 The excellent water barrier property of nanofibers was responsible for
295
retarding the surface dehydration of food products, suggesting promising applications in edible
296
packaging.45 As seen in Table 3, the water uptake ability increased significantly (p < 0.05) with the
297
increasing fraction of gelatin, probably due to the hydrophilicity of gelatin. This is in accordance
298
with the results of Soradech et al., who reported that in the composite shellac/gelatin film, the
299
higher gelatin content gave higher polarity and swelling capacity, thus attracting a higher amount of
300
water.43 The sufficient hydrophilicity and water uptake capacity of fibers were beneficial to improve
301
bio-adhesive, leading to a higher encapsulated compound bioavailability.1, 38
302
The gelatin weight loss profile of nanofibers immersed in water for 10 days was presented in
303
Figure 7 (F). The loss of the pure gelatin (EG01) fibers showed a rapid increase within 1 day and
304
reached 100% after 4 days. However, the composite fibers exhibited less gelatin weight loss and
305
leveled off after 3 days of water immersion. Clearly, with the increasing content of ethylcellulose,
306
the gelatin weight loss decreased significantly (p < 0.05). Gelatin, a safe polymer with high
307
stabilizing activity, affinity biocompatibility and biodegradability, exhibits numerous applications in 15
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry
308
food, biomaterial, adhesive, and pharmacy industries.9, 40 Hence, it is necessary to make sure of
309
sufficient gelatin stability for desired purpose.
310
In summary, the present work demonstrated that the ethylcellulose/gelatin composite
311
nanofibers with tunable physical properties may be fabricated by varying the weight ratios of
312
ethylcellulose and gelatin in the blend solutions. It was indicated that the better solution
313
compatibility resulted in the higher spinnability, leading to excellent morphology of fibers with
314
higher porosity. Generally, the composite fibers exhibited a uniform and highly-porous structure
315
with higher melting temperatures than the pure gelatin or ethylcellulose fibers, due to the
316
entanglement of molecular chains through hydrogen bonds. Notably, the fibers with higher gelatin
317
ratio possessed uniform morphology, adequate water uptake ability and vapor permeability, which
318
were beneficial to improve bio-adhesive of encapsulated compound for higher bioavailability and
319
reduce protein adhesion and bio-fouling, while the fibers with higher ethylcellulose proportion
320
showed hydrophobic surface, low water vapor permeability, and excellent water barrier property,
321
which were responsible for retarding the surface dehydration of food products. This work suggested
322
that the ethylcellulose/gelatin composite nanofibers may be used as promising materials for
323
bioactive encapsulation, food packaging and filtration applications.
324
Acknowledgement
325
This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant No.
326
31772013).
327
Conflict of interest
328 329
The authors declare no competing financial interest.
References 16
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Page 16 of 37
Page 17 of 37
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry
330
(1) Ghorani, B.; Tucker, N., Fundamentals of Electrospinning as a Novel Delivery Vehicle for
331
Bioactive Compounds in Food Nanotechnology. Food Hydrocolloid 2015, 51, 227-240.
332
(2) Wen, P.; Wen, Y.; Zong, M. H.; Linhardt, R. J.; Wu, H., Encapsulation of Bioactive Compound
333
in Electrospun Fibers and Its Potential Application. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2017, 65, 9161-9179.
334
(3) Bhushani, J. A.; Anandharamakrishnan, C., Electrospinning and Electrospraying Techniques:
335
Potential Food Based Applications. Trends Food Sci. Tech. 2014, 38, 21-33.
336
(4) Dong,
337
Superhydrophobic/Hydrophobic Surfaces Made from Amphiphiles through Droplet-Mediated
338
Evaporation-Induced Self-Assembly. J. Phys. Chem. B 2015, 119, 5321-5327.
339
(5) Wang, Y.; Chen, L., Fabrication and Characterization of Novel Assembled Prolamin Protein
340
Nanofabrics with Improved Stability, Mechanical Property and Release Profiles. J. Mater. Chem.
341
2012, 22, 21592-21601.
342
(6) Wang, X.; Ding, B.; Sun, G.; Wang, M.; Yu, J., Electro-Spinning/Netting: A Strategy for the
343
Fabrication of Three-Dimensional Polymer Nano-Fiber/Nets. Prog. Mater. Sci. 2013, 58,
344
1173-1243.
345
(7) Hualin, W.; Lilan, H.; Baicheng, N.; Suwei, J.; Junfeng, C.; Shaotong, J., Kinetics and
346
Antioxidant Capacity of Proanthocyanidins Encapsulated in Zein Electrospun Fibers by Cyclic
347
Voltammetry. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2016, 64, 3083-3090.
348
(8) Steyaert, I.; Rahier, H.; Vlierberghe, S. V.; Olijve, J.; Clerck, K. D., Gelatin Nanofibers:
349
Analysis of Triple Helix Dissociation Temperature and Cold-Water-Solubility. Food Hydrocolloid
350
2016, 57, 200-208.
351
(9) Taokaew, S.; Seetabhawang, S.; Siripong, P.; Phisalaphong, M., Biosynthesis and
F.; Zhang,
M.; Tang,
W.-W.; Wang,
Y.,
17
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Formation and
Mechanism
of
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry
352
Characterization of Nanocellulose-Gelatin Films. Mater. 2013, 6, 782-794.
353
(10) Kusumah, F. H.; Sriyanti, I.; Edikresnha, D.; Munir, M. M., Simply Electrospun
354
Gelatin/Cellulose Acetate Nnofibers and Their Physico-Chemical Characteristics. Mater. Sci. Forum
355
2017, 880, 95-98.
356
(11) Chang, S. T.; Chen, L. C.; Lin, S. B.; Chen, H. H., Nano-Biomaterials Application:
357
Morphology and Physical Properties of Bacterial Cellulose/Gelatin Composites Via Crosslinking.
358
Food Hydrocolloid 2012, 27, 137-144.
359
(12) Murtaza, G., Ethylcellulose Microparticles: A Review. Acta Pol. Pharm. 2012, 69, 11-22.
360
(13) Davidovich-Pinhas, M.; Co, E. D.; Barbut, S.; Marangoni, A. G., Physical Structure and
361
Thermal Behavior of Ethylcellulose. Cellulose 2015, 22, 2137-2137.
362
(14) Zhang, Z.; Zhang, H.; Zhang, Q.; Zhou, Q.; Zhang, H.; Mo, Z.; Zhao, X.; Wang, X.,
363
Thermotropic Liquid Crystallinity, Thermal Decomposition Behavior, and Aggregated Structure of
364
Poly(Propylene Carbonate)/Ethyl Cellulose Blends. J. Appl. Poly Sci. 2006, 100, 584-592.
365
(15) Lu, H. Y.; Wang, Q. Q.; Li, G. H.; Qiu, Y. Y.; Wei, Q. F., Electrospun Water-Stable Zein/Ethyl
366
Cellulose Composite Nanofiber and Its Drug Release Properties. Mater. Sci. Eng. C-Mater. Biol.
367
Appl. 2017, 74, 86-93.
368
(16) Swain, S. K.; Prusty, G.; Das, R., Sonochemical Compatibility of Polyvinyl
369
Alcohol/Polyacrylic Acid Blend in Aqueous Solution. J. Macromol. Sci. Part B-Phys. 2012, 51,
370
580-589.
371
(17) Chen, H. W.; Ma, Q.; Wang, S. D.; Liu, H.; Wang, K., Morphology, Compatibility, Physical
372
and Thermo-Regulated Properties of the Electrospinning Polyamide 6 and Polyethylene Glycol
373
Blended Nanofibers. J. Ind. Text. 2016, 45, 1490-1503. 18
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Page 18 of 37
Page 19 of 37
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry
374
(18) Wang, S. H.; Liu, J. H.; Pai, C. T.; Chen, C. W.; Chung, P. T.; Chiang, A. S. T.; Chang, S. J.,
375
Hansen Solubility Parameter Analysis on the Dispersion of Zirconia Nanocrystals. J. Colloid
376
Interface Sci. 2013, 407, 140-147.
377
(19) Miller, K. G.; Bowles, C. Q.; Chappelow, C. C.; Eick, J. D., Application of Solubility
378
Parameter Theory to Dentin-Bonding Systems and Adhesive Strength Correlations. J. Biomed.
379
Mater. Res. 1998, 41, 227-243.
380
(20) Ge, Z.; Xiao, C., Compatibility Studies with Blends Based on Poly(N‐Butyl Methacrylate)
381
and Polyacrylonitrile. J. Appl. Poly Sci. 2010, 115, 3357-3364.
382
(21) Yan, Q.; Zhao, T.; Bai, Y.; Zhang, F.; Yang, W., Precipitation Polymerization in Acetic Acid:
383
Study of the Solvent Effect on the Morphology of Poly(Divinylbenzene). J. Phys. Chem. B 2009,
384
113, 3008-14.
385
(22) Laha, A.; Yadav, S.; Majumdar, S.; Sharma, C. S., In-Vitro Release Study of Hydrophobic
386
Drug Using Electrospun Cross-Linked Gelatin Nanofibers. Biochem. Eng. J. 2016, 105, 481-488.
387
(23) Xiao, J.; Shi, C.; Zheng, H. J.; Shi, Z.; Jiang, D.; Li, Y. Q.; Huang, Q. R., Kafirin Protein Based
388
Electrospun Fibers with Tunable Mechanical Property, Wettability, and Release Profile. J. Agric.
389
Food Chem. 2016, 64, 3226-3233.
390
(24) Gomes, S.; Rodrigues, G.; Martins, G.; Henriques, C.; Silva, J. C., Evaluation of Nanofibrous
391
Scaffolds Obtained from Blends of Chitosan, Gelatin and Polycaprolactone for Skin Tissue
392
Engineering. Int. J. Biol. Macromol. 2017, 102, 1174-1185.
393
(25) Atila, D.; Keskin, D.; Tezcaner, A., Crosslinked Pullulan/Cellulose Acetate Fibrous Scaffolds
394
for Bone Tissue Engineering. Mater. Sci. Eng., C 2016, 69, 1103-1115.
395
(26) Vatankhah, E.; Prabhakaran, M. P.; Jin, G.; Mobarakeh, L. G.; Ramakrishna, S., Development 19
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry
396
of Nanofibrous Cellulose Acetate/Gelatin Skin Substitutes for Variety Wound Treatment
397
Applications. J. Biomater. Appl. 2014, 28, 909-921.
398
(27) Gravelle, A. J.; Davidovich-Pinhas, M.; Zetzl, A. K.; Barbut, S.; Marangoni, A. G., Influence
399
of Solvent Quality on the Mechanical Strength of Ethylcellulose Oleogels. Carbohydr. Polym. 2016,
400
135, 169-179.
401
(28) Peyches-Bach, A.; Dombre, C.; Moutounet, M.; Peyron, S.; Chalier, P., Effect of Ethanol on the
402
Sorption of Four Targeted Wine Volatile Compounds in a Polyethylene Film. J. Agric. Food Chem.
403
2012, 60, 6772-6781.
404
(29) Stortz, T. A.; Marangoni, A. G., The Replacement for Petrolatum: Thixotropic Ethylcellulose
405
Oleogels in Triglyceride Oils. Green Chem. 2014, 16, 3064-3070.
406
(30) Gravelle, A. J.; Davidovich-Pinhas, M.; Zetzl, A. K.; Barbut, S.; Marangoni, A. G., Influence
407
of Solvent Quality on the Mechanical Strength of Ethylcellulose Oleogels. Carbohydr. Polym. 2015,
408
135, 169.
409
(31) Shenoy, S. L.; Bates, W. D.; Wnek, G., Correlations between Electrospinnability and Physical
410
Gelation. Polym. 2005, 46, 8990-9004.
411
(32) Yoon, K.; Kim, K.; Wang, X.; Fang, D.; Hsiao, B. S.; Chu, B., High Flux Ultrafiltration
412
Membranes Based on Electrospun Nanofibrous Pan Scaffolds and Chitosan Coating. Polym. 2006,
413
47, 2434-2441.
414
(33) Zhong, S.; Zhang, Y.; Lim, C. T., Fabrication of Large Pores in Electrospun Nanofibrous
415
Scaffolds for Cellular Infiltration: A Review. Tissue Eng. Part B-Rev. 2012, 18, 77-87.
416
(34) Veleirinho, B.; Lopesdasilva, J. A., Application of Electrospun Poly(Ethylene Terephthalate)
417
Nanofiber Mat to Apple Juice Clarification. Process Biochem. 2009, 44, 353-356. 20
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Page 20 of 37
Page 21 of 37
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry
418
(35) Chiellini, E.; Cinelli, P.; Grillo, F. E.; Elrs, K.; Lazzeri, A., Gelatin-Based Blends and
419
Composites. Morphological and Thermal Mechanical Characterization. Biomacromolecule 2001, 2,
420
806-11.
421
(36) Mu, C.; Guo, J.; Li, X.; Lin, W.; Li, D., Preparation and Properties of Dialdehyde
422
Carboxymethyl Cellulose Crosslinked Gelatin Edible Films. Food Hydrocolloid 2012, 27, 22-29.
423
(37) Dafader, N. C.; Rahman, S. T.; Rahman, W.; Rahman, N.; Manir, M. S.; Alam, M. F.; Alam, J.;
424
Sumi, S. A., Preparation of Gelatin/Poly(Vinyl Alcohol) Film Modified by Methyl Methacrylate and
425
Gamma Irradiation. Int. J. Polym. Anal. Charact. 2016, 21, 513-523.
426
(38) Jiang, Y. C.; Lin, J.; An, H.; Wang, X. F.; Qian, L.; Turng, L. S., Electrospun
427
Polycaprolactone/Gelatin Composites with Enhanced Cell–Matrix Interactions as Blood Vessel
428
Endothelial Layer Scaffolds. Mater. Sci. Eng., B 2017, 71, 901-908.
429
(39) Ki, C. S.; Baek, D. H.; Gang, K. D.; Lee, K. H.; Um, I. C.; Park, Y. H., Characterization of
430
Gelatin Nanofiber Prepared from Gelatin–Formic Acid Solution. Polym. 2005, 46, 5094-5102.
431
(40) Sinthusamran, S.; Benjakul, S.; Kishimura, H., Characteristics and Gel Properties of Gelatin
432
from Skin of Seabass (Lates Calcarifer) as Influenced by Extraction Conditions. Food Chem. 2014,
433
152, 276-284.
434
(41) Desai, J.; Alexander, K.; Riga, A., Characterization of Polymeric Dispersions of
435
Dimenhydrinate in Ethyl Cellulose for Controlled Release. Int J Pharm 2006, 308, 115-23.
436
(42) Zhang, Y. Z.; Venugopal, J.; Huang, Z. M.; Lim, C. T.; Ramakrishna, S., Crosslinking of the
437
Electrospun Gelatin Nanofibers. Polym. 2006, 47, 2911-2917.
438
(43) Soradech, S.; Nunthanid, J.; Limmatvapirat, S.; Luangtanaanan, M., An Approach for the
439
Enhancement of the Mechanical Properties and Film Coating Efficiency of Shellac by the 21
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry
440
Formation of Composite Films Based on Shellac and Gelatin. J. Food Eng. 2012, 108, 94-102.
441
(44) Huang, L.; Arena, J. T.; Manickam, S. S.; Jiang, X.; Willis, B. G.; Mccutcheon, J. R., Improved
442
Mechanical Properties and Hydrophilicity of Electrospun Nanofiber Membranes for Filtration
443
Applications by Dopamine Modification. J. Membrane. Sci. 2014, 460, 241-249.
444
(45) Dutta, P. K.; Tripathi, S.; Mehrotra, G. K.; Dutta, J., Perspectives for Chitosan Based
445
Antimicrobial Films in Food Applications. Food Chem. 2009, 114, 1173-1182.
446 447
22
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Page 22 of 37
Page 23 of 37
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry
448
Figure captions
449
Figure 1 SEM images and the diameter distribution of the electrospun ethylcellulose/gelatin
450
nanofibers at weight ratios of 0/1, 1/3, 1/1, 3/1 and 1/0 (denoted as EG01, EG13, EG11, EG31 and
451
EG10, respectively). Lowercases indicated statistical significance (p < 0.05).
452 453
Figure 2 Porosity of the electrospun ethylcellulose/gelatin nanofibers at weight ratios of 0/1, 1/3,
454
1/1, 3/1 and 1/0 (denoted as EG01, EG13, EG11, EG31 and EG10, respectively). Lowercases
455
indicated statistical significance (p < 0.05).
456 457
Figure 3 TGA (A) and DSC (B) curves of the electrospun ethylcellulose/gelatin nanofibers at
458
weight ratios of 0/1, 1/3, 1/1, 3/1 and 1/0 (denoted as EG01, EG13, EG11, EG31 and EG10,
459
respectively).
460 461
Figure 4 FTIR spectra of the electrospun ethylcellulose/gelatin nanofibers at weight ratios of 0/1,
462
1/3, 1/1, 3/1 and 1/0 (denoted as EG01, EG13, EG11, EG31 and EG10, respectively).
463 464
Figure 5 Water contact angles of the electrospun ethylcellulose/gelatin nanofibers at weight ratios
465
of 0/1, 1/3, 1/1, 3/1 and 1/0 (denoted as EG01, EG13, EG11, EG31 and EG10, respectively).
466 467
Figure 6 Water evapotation of the electrospun ethylcellulose/gelatin nanofibers at weight ratios of
468
0/1, 1/3, 1/1, 3/1 and 1/0 (denoted as EG01, EG13, EG11, EG31 and EG10, respectively).
469
23
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry
470
Figure 7 SEM images of the electrospun ethylcellulose/gelatin nanofibers at weight ratios of 0/1
471
(A), 1/3 (B), 1/1 (C), 3/1 (D) and 1/0 (E) (denoted as EG01, EG13, EG11, EG31 and EG10,
472
respectively). (F) The gelatin weight loss profiles of the nanofibers after immersed in water for 10
473
days.
474
24
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Page 24 of 37
Page 25 of 37
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry
475
Tables
476
Table 1 (A). The reported Hansen solubility parameters (in MPa0.5) of polymers and solvents.
a
477
a
Literature values
δd
δp
δh
δt
Ethylcellulose29
16.6
8.3
9.7
20.9
Gelatin19
16.0
20.3
23.6
35.0
Water28
15.5
16.0
42.3
47.8
Ethanol28
15.8
8.8
19.4
26.5
Acetic acid21
14.6
7.9
15.2
22.5
Water/Ethanol/Acetic acid (2/2/6, v/v/v)
15.0
6.5
21.5
30.0
Here, δmix= Φ1·δh1 + Φ2·δh2, Φ represents the volume ratio of each solvent in solution.
478
25
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry
Page 26 of 37
479
Table 1 (B). The calculated difference in Hansen solubility parameters (in MPa0.5) and the apparent
480
viscosity at shear rate of 1 s-1 of the ethylcellulose/gelatin solutions at weight ratios of 0/1, 1/3, 1/1,
481
3/1 and 1/0 (denoted as EG01, EG13, EG11, EG31 and EG10, respectively). Polymer-solvent
Ethanol/acetic acid/water (2/6/2,v/v/v) a
Apparent viscosityb
Ra
(Pa·s)
2.1
14.1
2.51 ± 0.06 e
10.8
1.4
11.1
6.74 ± 0.34 c
1.3
7.8
4.8
9.6
5.24 ± 0.11 d
EG31
1.5
4.8
8.3
9.9
13.40 ± 0.55 a
EG10
1.6
1.8
11.8
12.2
8.53 ± 0.10 b
compatibility
δd
δp
δh
EG01
1.0
13.8
EG13
1.2
EG11
482
a
Here, (Ra)2= 4·(δd2-δd1)2 + (δp2-δp1)2 + (δh2-δh1)2.
483
b
Lowercases in the column indicated statistical significance (p < 0.05).
484
26
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Page 27 of 37
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry
485
Table 2 (A). The weight loss rate (Mr) and maximum degradation temperature (Tdm) of TGA curves
486
of the electrospun ethylcellulose/gelatin nanofibers at weight ratios of 0/1, 1/3, 1/1, 3/1 and 1/0
487
(denoted as EG01, EG13, EG11, EG31 and EG10, respectively). Part I (0 - 160 °C)
Part II (160 - 380 °C)
Part III (380 - 600 °C)
Samples
488
a
Mr (%)
Tdm (°C)
Mr (%)
Tdm (°C)
Mr (%)
Tdm (°C)
EG01
2.24
63.65
57.93
311.82
12.77
-a
EG13
1.29
62.37
37.22
353.01
6.66
-
EG11
1.09
60.42
68.29
355.16
8.48
-
EG31
0.26
-
84.38
352.41
4.13
-
EG10
0.09
-
93.09
349.18
1.47
-
Not available.
489
27
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry
Page 28 of 37
490
Table 2 (B). The transition temperature (Tm), enthalpy (Hm) and glass transition temperature (Tg) in
491
DSC curves of the electrospun ethylcellulose/gelatin nanofibers at weight ratios of 0/1, 1/3, 1/1, 3/1
492
and 1/0 (denoted as EG01, EG13, EG11, EG31 and EG10, respectively).
493
a
Samples
Tm1 (°C)
Hm1 (J/g)
Tm2 (°C)
Hm2 (J/g)
Tm3 (°C)
Hm3 (J/g)
Tg
EG01
60.31
6.13
121.47
189.0
213.34
12.98
-a
EG13
61.13
4.62
127.22
174.4
215.65
6.63
-
EG11
66.10
3.31
112.40
98.37
218.35
3.79
-
EG31
63.31
2.00
107.70
64.03
217.18
1.80
-
EG10
-
-
65.73
25.51
190.95
2.42
123.47
Not available.
494
28
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Page 29 of 37
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry
495
Table 3. The surface swelling, water uptake and weight loss of the electrospun ethylcellulose/gelatin
496
nanofibers at weight ratios of 0/1, 1/3, 1/1, 3/1 and 1/0 (denoted as EG01, EG13, EG11, EG31 and
497
EG10, respectively), after immersed in water for 10 days.
498 499 500
Samples
Surface swelling (%)
Water uptake (%)
Weight loss (%)
EG01
-a
-
-
EG13
-37.11 ± 0.75 a
1234.14 ± 256.49 a
21.60 ± 1.02 a
EG11
-30.60 ± 4.12 b
832.36 ± 66.61 ab
11.45 ± 0.76 b
EG31
-21.13 ± 1.56 c
393.07 ± 28.29 c
2.58 ± 0.14 c
EG10
-27.37 ± 3.06 b
550.75 ± 20.93 bc
3.35 ± 0.43 c
a
The pure gelatin nanofibers were completely dissolved in water.
b
Lowercases indicated statistical significance (p < 0.05) within each column.
29
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry
Figure 1
30
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Page 30 of 37
Page 31 of 37
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry
Figure 2
31
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry
Figure 3
501
32
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Page 32 of 37
Page 33 of 37
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry
Figure 4
33
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry
Figure 5
34
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Page 34 of 37
Page 35 of 37
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry
Figure 6
35
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry
Figure 7
502
36
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Page 36 of 37
Page 37 of 37
503
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry
Abstract graphic
37
ACS Paragon Plus Environment