Abstract
Background: Different synthetic materials are constantly being utilized as raw materials for packaging, which might have several drawbacks, like plastic, some of which have poor lifespans. Plastic can get damaged, scratched, or fractured over time, easily take in tastes and fragrances, and significantly affect the environment and health. Excessive plastic waste may lead to environmental pollution and related consequences. Plastics that contaminate food have also been linked to health problems like high blood pressure, heart palpitations, headaches, nausea, diarrhea, and flushing.
Objective: The present review entails the hazards associated with the usage of plastic as a packaging material and highlights the necessity to reduce its use and promote alternatives and sustainable production. Thus, the present review portrays the need for biopolymers, types of plant polymers, methods of cellulose extraction and derivatization, the manufacturing process of cellulosic films and thereby use as film and coatings for food preservation. The current review also summarizes different quality control tests for effective utilization as an alternative to synthetic polymers.
Conclusion: Different polymers derived from agricultural products are excellent candidates for creating packaging materials. Similar to polysaccharides, these polymers, including nanocomposites, films, composites, etc., are helpful in a wide range of applications. Cellulose, one of the most widespread polysaccharides in the world, offers a variety of appealing special qualities. It appears reasonable and must be considered that cellulose can be used effectively as a raw material for packaging. In this review, we explore how cellulose is used in the packaging industry to make composites, coating materials, and edible and non-edible films.
Graphical Abstract
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/9781444392180.ch7]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-81-322-2262-0_11]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2017.07.024] [PMID: 28755809]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.05.005]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fnut.2018.00121] [PMID: 30564581]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10570-017-1576-3]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10570-019-02318-y]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0079-6700(97)00039-7]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02652030110087483] [PMID: 11962705]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02652039709374585] [PMID: 9373537]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/B978-012311632-1/50047-4]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/B978-012311632-1/50048-6]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2012.10.029] [PMID: 23186663]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1201/9780203508206.ch2]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1201/9780203508206.ch6]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/B978-044451114-0/50026-0]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1201/9780203508206.ch1]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0079-6700(01)00027-2]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1201/9780203508206.ch19]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.carbpol.2007.09.015]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jctb.2567]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1754-6834-6-25] [PMID: 23414733]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2017.05.181] [PMID: 28587962]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2621.2009.01911.x]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S1466-8564(02)00050-4]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10570-007-9143-y]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.memsci.2005.12.025]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.fpsl.2019.100345]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.matchemphys.2018.09.028]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2019.12.241] [PMID: 31891698]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/ncomms8170] [PMID: 26006731]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/acsnano.5b06781] [PMID: 26673796]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/acsnano.9b02081] [PMID: 30943014]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-75626-4_9]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2020.12.066] [PMID: 33310098]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10601329308021259]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-4628(19970411)64:2<231::AID-APP4>3.0.CO;2-S]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.carbpol.2010.02.021]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.foodcont.2012.01.046]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.15376/biores.2.2.179-192]