See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/318017387

Bioplastics-classification, production and their potential food applications

Article · June 2017

DOI: 10.5958/2230-7338.2017.00024.6

CITATIONS READS
7 9,998

2 authors, including:

Satish Kumar
Lovely Professional University
18 PUBLICATIONS   22 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Standardization of postharvest treatments and active packaging conditions for retaining storage quality of pear cv. Bartlett View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Satish Kumar on 01 August 2017.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Journal of Hill Agriculture 8(2): 118-129, April – June, 2017
DOI 10.5958/2230-7338.2017.00024.6
REVIEW PAPER
Bioplastics - classification, production and their potential
food applications
SATISH KUMAR • KS THAKUR
Received: June 9, 2017, Revised: June 16, 2017, Accepted: June 21, 2017
ABSTRACT Bioplastics are polymers that are capable
of undergoing decomposition into CO2, H2O and
inorganic compounds or biomass through
predominantly the enzymatic action of
microorganisms. The market for these environmentally
friendly materials is expanding rapidly with a growth
rate of 10-20 % per year. The global market for
biodegradable polymers is expected to rise at an
average annual growth rate of 12.6 % to 206 million
pounds by 2020. Biodegradable polymers are classified
as agro-polymers (starch, chitin, protein) and bio
polyesters (polyhydroxy-alkanoates, poly-lactic acid
etc). They are mostly used to pack short shelf life
products, like fresh fruits and vegetables, and long
shelf life products, like pasta and chips, which do not
require very high oxygen and/or water barrier
properties. The developments in the bio-based
packaging offers a great potential to reduce our
dependency on limited petroleum resources because, it
is important to realize that a thorough evaluation of the
functional properties of a bio-based material is
essential before it can be used as an alternative for
traditional film materials.
KEYWORDS Packaging waste, environmental
concerns, bioplastics, classification, disposal options,
food uses
Kumar Satish Thakur KS
Department of Food Science and Technology, Dr YS Parmar
University of Horticulture and Forestry, Nauni, Solan - 173
230, Himachal Pradesh, India
Satish Kumar ( )
E mail: satishsharma1666@gmail.com
INTRODUCTION
Packaging waste, form a significant part of solid
waste and has led to increasing environmental
concerns, resulting in strengthening of various
regulations aimed at reducing their impact. A wide
range of conventional oil-based polymers is currently
in use in almost every industry. Oil-based polymers are
virtually non-biodegradable and are difficult to recycle
or re-use. In the recent years the use of bio-based
polymers in packaging has generated interest amongst
researchers as they bring a significant contribution to
sustainable development with a wider range of disposal
options.
Developing a polymer with durability, that matches
the product shelf-life, is one of the toughest challenges
faced by packaging industry in its efforts to produce
bio-based primary packaging. The bio-based packaging
material must remain stable without changes in
mechanical and/or barrier properties and must function
properly during storage, until disposal. Plastic films are
highly appreciated in the food industry because of their
wide range of properties and at present, it is not
possible to replace plastic packaging completely from
the market.
Going into the history, there was virtually no
existence of plastics in world, one century ago and in
last 90-100 years they have entered nearly all aspects
of our life. Plastic is the most useful synthetic
manmade substance, derived from the elements
extracted from fossil fuel. Plastics are the polymers,
which become mobile on heating and can be cast
into various moulds. These plastics are typical
materials of the last century and have made a
tremendous growth of some hundreds of tonnes/year at
the beginning of the 1930s to more than 150 million
tonnes/year at the end of the 20th century with 220
million tonnes forecast by 2025. Western Europe is
Journal of Hill Agriculture (Volume 8, No. 2, April – June, 2017)
estimated to account 19 % of this amount. Today, the
use of plastic in the US is 109 kg/person/year, in
Europe is 65 kg/person/year, and in countries like India
9.7 kg/person/year (Jogdand 1999, Fig 1). The share of
most common types of the plastics in production and
wastage have been shown in Table 1.
Fig 1 Per capita plastic products consumption (kg/person/year)
The features associated to plastics are beyond
dispute however, increasing concerns about the
preservation of our ecological systems, their effects on
human health, increasing pressure on limited petroleum
resources and non-biodegradable nature of plastics in
addition plastic recycling has a negative eco-balance
as this requires high energy and difficulties arise from
contaminants and fibre reinforcements due to
production of complex multi-phased products during
plastic recycling which has compounded the problem
further (Widmer 2003). Further, use of polymers
having longer durability in products with a short life-
span i.e the food items etc. is not advisable all these
concerns have given birth to development of more
sustainable alternate (Urbaniak 2004). However,
beyond these disputes plastics are still indiscriminately
used in the industries including the food industry as
they have versatile properties i.e. strength and stiffness,
barrier to gases, moisture, transparency and grease,
resistance to food component attack and flexibility
(Avella et al. 2001).
Table 1 Share of most important types of plastics in production and
waste
Polymer Production (%) Share in waste (%)
Polyethylene 30-34 40-47
Polypropylene 12-15 12-19
Polystyrene 8-10 13-17
PET 2-5 5-12
PVC 19-22 10-11
Polyurethan 5-7 4-8
Other Thermoplastic 7-12 8-9
Other plastic 7-20 6-11
At present the main focus of the plastics industry is
to develop novel polymeric material having properties
comparable to their conventional counterparts but, at
the same time should have additional advantage of at
least some level of biodegradability. Innovative
119
products have slowly started to infiltrate the market
and have started to replace conventional polymers,
particularly for short-term applications (fresh food
packaging, agriculture etc.). The potential of
biodegradable polymers has been recognized for a long
as they provide an interesting solution to overcome the
limitation of conventional plastics and at the same time
also helps in reduction of CO2 emissions (Narayan
2001). The bio based polymers still have not entered the
market with their potential applications as high
production costs and sometimes their underperforming
properties still restricts their use. Overall, this review
focuses on different classes of these biopolymers, their
production technology, potential application in the food
packaging and their biodegradation.
RANGE OF BIOPOLYMERS
The manufacturing of biodegradable packaging is
subject of research and, particularly their renewable
nature and degradation in closed or open conditions.
Biopolymers can be derived from different natural
resources mainly polysaccharides, proteins and fibers
(lignins) which at present are most obvious and easily
available alternatives (Reiter 2002). However, these
natural polymers on their own do not demonstrate
similar material properties comparable to traditional
plastics, further limiting their direct use. Tremendous
research and development activities are underway for
building and perfecting these new generation polymers
to make them a perfect fit for different applications.
The two major groups of biodegradable plastics
entering or positioned to enter the market in near future
are polylactic acid (PLA) and starch based polymers
(Bilby 2000). These polymers have significant
potential as their properties can easily be altered and
the desirable features can be imparted at the same time
with wide range of disposal options and minor
environmental impact (Narayan 2001).
BIODEGRADABLE POLYMERS
According to the European Bioplastics
Organization (EBO), bioplastics are de
“Plastics based on renewable resources (biobased) or
plastics which are biodegradable and/or compostable”.
These biopolymers undergo decomposition into CO 2,
H2O and inorganic compounds or biomass under
natural or stimulated conditions through predominantly
by enzymatic action of microorganisms (Song et al.
2009). Further, for a polymer to be categorized as
bioplastic, the following four criteria must be fulfilled
(Ezeoha and Ezenwanne 2013)
Chemical characteristics: At least 50 % of its final
composition should be necessarily organic matter.
Biodegradation: The developed polymer should
degrade by a minimum of 90 % of its weight/volume
within 6 months under stimulated composting
120
conditions.
Ecotoxicity: Undegradable residuals of biopolymer
after biodegradation for 6 months, should not be a
potential threat to the growth of plants.
Disintegration: The biobased polymer should, at least
within a timeframe of 2 months, fragment microscopic
undetectable components (< 2 mm) under controlled
composting conditions.
Biodegradable polymers represent a growing field
with vast number of polymers (e.g. cellulose, chitin,
starch, polyhydroxyalkanoates (PHA), polylactide
(PLA), polycaprolactone (PCL), collagen and other
polypeptides) which are either formed naturally or are
produced in microorganism during their growth cycles
(Kaplan et al.1993, Van and Kiekens 2002, Rouilly and
Rigal 2002). Successful techniques have been
developed to isolate and genetically manipulate some
microorganisms and enzymes systems to produce such
biopolymers.
CLASSIFICATION
Various classification system based on different
criteria’s have been proposed to classify of these
biopolymers as they can be derived from a large
Fig 2 Classification of the biodegradable polymers
SATISH KUMAR • KS THAKUR
number of renewable sources and it is difficult to
restrict them in a single class. However, one
classification system based on their origin (Fig.2)
divides these biopolymers into four major categories of
which the first three are derived from renewable
resources and the last one is a blend of biopolymer and
commercial polyesters. Broadly these biopolymers can
be subdivided into two broad categories i.e. agro-
polymers (category 1) and biodegradable polyesters
(categories 2-4) or biopolyesters (Averous and Pollet
2012).
Bioplastics based on polysaccharides: Starch is an
abundant naturally occurring material composed of two
types of glucose polymers, amylose and amylopectin.
The respective ratio of amylose and amylopectin,
significantly affects the physicochemical properties of
starch which, in turn, influences its functionality and
eventual applications. Higher amylose content
contributes to film strength however, branched
structure of amylopectin generally leads to film with
low mechanical properties which can be improved by
using plasticizers such as sorbitol and glycerol (Mali et
al. 2002).
Journal of Hill Agriculture (Volume 8, No. 2, April – June, 2017)
Biopoymers developed from starch have many
advantages like higher biodegradability, renewability
and good oxygen barrier properties which makes them
the most suitable alternative for some commercial
applications with the above advantages as the primary
requirements of a package (Thunwall and Rigdahl
2006). Native starch occur as a heteropolymer in nature
and is used in different forms for blending with
conventional polymers for the production of
biopolymers (Sriroth et al. 2014).
Starch in the granular form: The primary structure of
starch granule can be retained by mixing/blending
starch with limited moisture and in commercial
applications starch is gelatinized at 65-70°C with 45 %
moisture. The melting point of dry starch (almost
anhydrous) is about 17°C but if it melted in dry state it
loses it mechanical strength. Biopolymers
manufactured by blending conventional polymers and
granular starch have starch granules embedded in the
plastic polymers (continuous phase) which reinforces
the structure and thereby, increases strength, water
absorption, film permeability and at the same time
decreases the production cost of the polymeric film.
Gelatinized starch: By controlling the moisture
content, starch granule structure can be totally
gelatinized, melting the polymer thereby providing a
convenience of mixing two different polymers
together. Gelatinized starch based polymers have
improved elongation and tensile strength which are
sometimes the product specific requirements for the
packaging.
Thermoplastic starch (TPS): Thermoplastic starch is
obtained by the spontaneous destructurization of the
starch granule in the presence of plasticizers. Extrusion
processing employing, low moisture content, high
temperature and pressure, melts the starch granules
which acts as a single continuous phase component
which later can be mixed with other ingredients to form
the film.
Modified starch: The simple starch molecules are
engineered to modify their properties by addition of
ester groups to manipulate them for specific use i.e. to
support the blending mechanism with improvement in
its thermal stability, water vapour transmission rate,
moisture absorption and enhanced barrier properties for
different gasses.
Keeping in mind the biodegradable nature of starch
with many desirable features, (enough strength and
thermal stability) several attempts have been made to
develop starch based biopolymers to impart some
biodegradability in conventional polymers. A
remarkable success has been recorded in starch mixed
121
with low-density polyethylene (Albertsson and
Karlsson 1995). The hydrophilic nature of starch
molecules and hydrophobic nature of the plastics
however, results in poor starch-polymer interfacial
interaction with loss of mechanical properties though, a
stronger interaction between the starch granules and the
plastic matrix has been achieved with gelatinized or
'destructured' starches (Ellis et al.1998).
Native starch molecules form (granule, gelatinized,
thermoplastic or modified starch) is important
determinant of mechanical properties of the polymeric
films i.e. modulus, tensile stress and yield stress which
defines specific applications and ultimate use of the
films developed (Lim et al. 1992). Nonetheless, it has
been notices that adhesion plays a greater role than
particle size of the starch granule on starch-
polyethylene blended films tensile strength (Willett
1994). In contrary, good adhesion was not as important
as the particle size provided the frictional forces
between the phases were not surpassed by the applied
external stresses (Nielsen and Landel 1994). Mostly,
starch granules are used as fillers in conventional
polymers whereby they improve the dimensional
stability and stiffness (tensile modulus) of the polymer
important for heavy transportation purpose. However,
studies have revealed that beyond the usage level of 15
% granules there is a steep decline in mechanical
properties of the film and may lead to a fracture on
surface due to poor interaction between the starch
granules and the polymer matrix.
Despite different challenges efforts are still on way
to develop new packages with novel properties and in
one such attempt cellulose acetate having relatively
high stiffness, low density and capability to improve
the mechanical properties and water resistance of
polymer was blended with chemically modified potato
starch (Chen et al. 2003). Tensile strength and moisture
stability of the polymer developed was considerably
increased compared with simple cellulose acetate
membrane. Thermoplastic starch also provides the
potential possibility of blending with the other
polymers and two synthetic biopolymers PLA
(Polylactic acid) and PCL (polycaprolactone) are the
most researched and explored material in this category
as they are chemically most viable for development of
biopolymers with properties comparable to
conventional plastics.
Biodegradable plastic packaging film consisting of
cassava starch, polyvinyl alcohol (acts as an adhesives
and thickening agent), talc powder (lubricant),
glycerine (colourless, odorless, viscous liquid with a
high boiling point used as plasticizer), urea (used as
crossing link agent) and water was prepared (Ezeoha
and Ezenwanne 2013). The film was further studied for
various physico-chemical changes and its effect on
122
food inside during storage and the results suggested the
comparative properties of the film with the
conventional polymers. Biodegradable films can also
be derived from chitosan, a polymer extracted from
chitin of crustacean and insect exo-skeletons having a
chemical structure similar to cellulose.
Fig 3 Methodology cassava starch film preparation
Rather than developing new biobased polymers the
recent focus of the scientific community is to impart
partial degradability in the conventional polymers,
blending them with biopolymers or adding some
bioactive compounds to them. These polymers
however have very high cost of production as in the
present scenario limited volume of production and lab
scale modelling of these bio polymers restricts their
commercial use. Some companies like Biotec
(Bioplast, from corn and potatoes), Limagrain (Biolice,
from corn and flour), Novamont (Mater-Bi®, from
corn), Plantic (Plantic®, from corn), Rodenburg
(Solanyl®, from potato products) however, have gone
a step further with commercial production facilities and
the products that have started to show in market
(ASTM 2011).
Bioplastics derived from proteins : For many years,
various raw materials have been used for production of
renewable and biodegradable packaging and one such
material proteins have a vast and empirical potential
and use history e.g. traditional lipoprotein skins in Asia
and collagen sausage. Until recently, the only uses and
applications of proteins were in food formulations
however, the development in non-food uses of
agricultural raw materials, and more particularly tools
classically developed in the field of polymer science,
have widened the potential applications of such by-
SATISH KUMAR • KS THAKUR
products from agriculture industry. The functional
properties of these materials are highly dependent on
structural heterogeneity, thermal sensitivity, and
hydrophilic behaviour of protein molecules. A large
number of proteins from vegetable and animal sources
can be used as the raw material for developing
bioplastics materials.
Wheat gluten a by-product from the bio-ethanol
industry is relatively inexpensive, abundantly available
and most widely used as animal feed however, their
potential application as packaging in baking industry
has shown growing interest as they have interesting
film formation, gas barrier, mechanical and
biodegradation properties (Olabarrieta et al. 2006). The
wheat gluten have two type of proteins depending on
their solubility in aqueous ethanol solution and their
molecular weight (Wieser 2007) gliadins and glutenins
which are responsible for ultimate properties of the
polymer developed from them, with the former acting
in intra-molecular and later in inter-molecular
disulphide linkages (Johansson et al. 2013). Wheat
gluten is thermoplastic in nature, it has been used for
making films and natural fiber based biocomposites
(Muneer et al. 2014) and reinforced nano-composites
(Kuktaite et al. 2014) with improved barrier and
mechanical properties suitable for many food
packaging applications. Wheat gluten based
biopolymers reinforced with clay and nano-composites
have been developed with improved oxygen barrier
properties being suitable for packaging (Kuktaite et al.
2014).
Bioplastics from from biotechnological inventions
The efforts of biotechnology and agricultural
industries to replace conventional plastics with plant
derived alternatives have three recent approaches i.e.
(i) converting plant sugars into plastic, (ii) producing
plastic inside micro-organisms and (iii) growing plastic
in corn and other crops.
Polylactic acid (PLA)
Among the wide range of biodegradable polymers,
PLA an aliphatic polyester commonly made from
hydroxyl acids, that includes polyglycolic acid (PGA)
which can easily be modified by polymerization is the
most promising biopolymer having highest market
share. Polylactic acid (PLA) behaves quite similarly to
polyolefines and can be converted into plastic by
standard processing methods such as injection
moulding and extrusion. Currently main obstacle in
commercial production of PLA based bioplastic is high
price of the raw material and the lack of a composting
infrastructure in the markets which is an essential
prerequisite for commercial use of PLA. PLA based
packaging potentially have highest utilization in the
food packaging. The current global market for lactic
acid is 100,000 tonnes/annum, of which more than
Journal of Hill Agriculture (Volume 8, No. 2, April – June, 2017) 123

75 % is used in the food industry (Raija 2003). PLA is exclusively by PLA packaging and most of the
manufactured from lactic acid by two different research efforts are oriented towards the development
methods. of PLA blended with other material to further improve
The first method uses cyclic lactic acid dimer its properties (Sinclair 1996). For instance, Cargill has
lactide produced in the lactic acid cycle as intermediate developed processes that use corn and other feedstock
compound to yield PLA with higher molecular weight. to produce different PLA grades (Bigg 1996) and has
Direct polymerization of lactic acid usually scaled-up the process of turning sugar into lactic acid
condensation polymerisation which results in polymers and subsequently its polymerization into the polylactic
with low molecular weight. acid packaging with the trade name NatureWorksTM.
Two types of fermentation can be used to create
bio-plastics from the lactic acid i.e. lactic acid
fermentation where, the lactic acid produced, it is
converted to poly-lactic acid using traditional
polymerization processes and bacterial polyester
fermentation which is the process where bacteria’s i.e.
Ralstoniaeutropha, Ralstoniaeutropha, Bacillus
megaterium, Ralstonia spp., Pseudomonas putida,
Pseudomonas spp., Bacillus mycoides,
Alcanivoraxborkumensi, Rhodococcusruber, etc. are
used to create polyesters by using the sugar from
plants, such as corn, to fuel their cellular processes and
by-product of these cellular processes is the polymer.
General production process for polylactic acid
(PLA) is shown (Fig 4) which is most common
industrial process today (Averous 2011). Raw materials
which serve as the source of energy for the
microorganisms like corn undergoes fermentation to
produce lactic acid, followed by its polymerization into
polylactic acid (PLA). This process requires a bacterial
strain, a carbon source (carbohydrates), a nitrogen
source (yeast extract, peptides), and mineral elements Fig 4 Production technology of PLA
to allow the growth of bacteria for the production of
lactic acid. Lactic acid, a chiral molecule exists in two Different companies such as Mitsui Chemicals
forms, L- and D-lactic acid dominated exclusively by (Japan), Mitsubishi (Japan), Shimadzu (Japan), Futerro
L-lactic acid which leads to formation of poly (L-lactic (Total/Galactic-Belgium), Purac (Netherland), Teijin
acid) (PLLA) with low molecular weight by (Japan), and Zhejiang Hisun Biomaterials (China) has
polycondensation reaction. Slight modifications in the also jumped into the market with different PLA
chemical process could lead to various ratio of L- and products with a wide range of L/D ratios for
D-lactic acid which further affects the properties of the preparation of different polymers with product specific
finished polymer. The chemical reactions, leading to properties. PLA consumption is only around 200,000
formation of a cyclic dimer, the lactide, as an tonnes/year (0.2 million tonnes/year) and nearly 30 %
intermediate step in production of PLA, could lead to of total lactic acid produced is used for PLA production
long macromolecular chains with L and D lactic acid worldwide. Unfortunately, the impact strength and
monomers. The final properties of PLA can be altered thermal properties of PLA are not sufficient for most of
by adjusting the proportions and the sequencing of L the food applications. Therefore, at present, stereo
and D lactic acid units in the developed polymer complex PLA produced from L-lactide and D-lactide,
(Kaplan et al. 1993, Garlotta 2001, Okada 2002, are being intensively investigated. The recent trends in
Albertsson and Varma 2002). research are focused on the improvement of the
For most commercial packaging applications 90 % mechanical properties of the PLA while still
L lactide and 10 % racemic D lactide mixture is used. maintaining the biodegradability of the material to
This material is readily polymerised, easily melt achieve the maximum benefits.
processable and oriented further, due to its commercial
production it is relatively cheap compared to other Bioplastics from microbial sources
bioplastics available in the market (Vert et al.1995, Micro-organisms have been a source of
Sinclair 1996, Lunt 1998, Steinbuchel and Doi 2002). investigation for bioplastics and biopolymers
Present bioplastic market of the world is dominated (polysaccharides) utilizing the agricultural waste as the
124
growth medium. Although, currently they are more
expensive yet bacteria have the potential of yielding
bioplastics having properties comparable with the
conventional polymers which can further be altered by
changing the growing medium and growth conditions
of the bacteria as well. The process of the production of
bioplastics from microbes have been optimised with a
range of end products having widened up properties. A
large number of biopolymers developed have gained
acceptability in food and other industrial applications
and one such microbiologically-synthesized plastic is,
polyhydroxyalkanoate commonly known as (PHA)
which is synthesized from different groups of bacterial
from cheap renewable resources and is degraded
aerobically to CO2 and H2O completely by
microorganisms under stimulated control atmosphere.
PHA is produced using some natural isolates and
recombinant bacteria strain (Table 2) on different
substrate along with the amount of PHA accumulated
inside the bacterial cells (Yu 2007). For exploiting the
complete benefits and the commercial production of
these biopolymers it is important to select a bacterial
strain having highest production of PHA which at the
same time can grow on inexpensive carbon sources
with efficient fermentation with simple recovery
process (Khanna and Srivastava 2005). These are the
parameters which need to be standardized prior to
commercial production of PHA.
Polyhydroxyalkanoate (PHA), is synthesized by
bacteria under unbalanced growth conditions which
regulate the type and amount of PHA in the cell
(Albuquerque et al. 2007). Some bacteria may produce
PHA as high as 90 % (w/w) of dry weight of cells by
changing the growing conditions such as depletion of
essential nutrients (nitrogen, phosphorus or
magnesium) from the media. PHA a storage compound
of energy in the microbes, also assists them as a sink
Fig 5 Process protocol for the synthesis of PHB
SATISH KUMAR • KS THAKUR
for reducing equivalents (Schubert et al.1988). PHA is
insoluble inside bacterial cytoplasm, and does not
increase in osmotic pressure of the bacterial cells due
to its accumulation thereby allowing them to
accumulate more PHA without restricting their growth.
More than 250 different natural PHA-producers
have been identified till date but, only a few have made
it for the commercial biosynthesis including
Alcaligenes latus, B. megaterium, C. necator and P.
oleovorans, as they can utilize the easily available and
economic raw materials as the carbon sources. C.
necator has been the most extensively studied and
commonly bacterium for PHA production. Earlier
glucose-utilizing mutant of C. necator was used for
industrial production of PHA and was sold as
BiopolTM (Luzier, 1992). After commercial
production of Biopol started it came to light that PHA-
producing microbes harbor a native machinery for
polymer degradation, making the recovery process of
PHA molecules from the bacterial cells difficult
(Reddy et al. 2003). This led to the development of
genetic engineering in the identifying and isolating
bacterial strains that can produce higher amounts of
PHA with simple extraction procedures. PHA is
produced industrially by two major processes i.e. by
fermentation and from renewable resources.
Fermentation processes
Depending on standard culture conditions with
maximum PHA production, bacteria used for the
production are classified into two groups.
First group of bacteria is subjected to limited supply
of essential nutrients such as nitrogen, oxygen and
excess carbon for high production of PHA. Different
bacteria well adopted for such growth conditions are C.
necator, Protomonas extorquens and Protomonas
oleovoran.
Journal of Hill Agriculture (Volume 5, No. 2 July – December 2014)
Second group of bacteria are grown in cultures
having enough supply of all the essential growth
factors and bacteria in this group includes Alcaligenes
latus, Azotobacter vinelandii and recombinant E. coli
(Lee 1996).
Two types of fermentation processes i.e. batch and
fed-batch fermentations used for production and
multiplication of these bacterial strains. Fed-batch
cultivation is however, more efficient than batch
cultivation as very high cell concentration can be
achieved in limited time and has an additional benefit
Table 2 Bacteria used for production of PHA from plant oils and wastes
Strains PHA type
Alcaligenes latus DSM 1124 P(3HB)
Bacillus megaterium P(3HB)
Burkholderia sp. USM (JCM-15050) P(3HB)
Comamonas testosterone mcl-PHA
Cupriavidus necator P(3HB)
Cupriavidus necator, H16
P(3HB-co- 3HV)
Cupriavidus necator DSM-545 P(3HB)
Recombinant Cupriavidus necator P(3HB-co- 3HHx)
Recombinant Escherichia coli P(3HB-co- 3HHx-co-3HO)
Pseudomonas aeruginosa IFO-3924 mcl PHA
Pseudomonas aeruginosa NCIB -40045 mcl PHA
Pseudomonas guezennei biovar. Tikehau mcl PHA
Thermus thermophilus HB8 P(3HV-co-3HHp-co-3HN-co-3HU) Whey
Development from renewable resources
Despite the advantages associated to PHA the
commercialization of PHA has been ongoing since
1980s with limited success. Similar to the other
biopolymers the high production cost of PHA limits
their commercialization over the conventional
polymers (Choi and Lee 1997). Efforts have been put
in place to reduce cost of production by managing the
growth variables through the development of efficient
bacterial strains, fermentation procedures and easy
recovery processes (Lee 1996, Grothe et al.1999).
A generalized schematic representation of the
process followed for the lab scale modelling
production process of PHA (Fig 5) has been shown
(Disha et al. 2012). The selection of carbon substrate
determines the overall performance of the bacterial
fermentation and the cost of the final product.
Therefore, renewable, inexpensive and most readily
available carbon substrates i.e. waste effluents of oil
plant, fatty acids, alkanes as well as simple
carbohydrates are used (Lageveen et al.1988, Eggink et
al.1992, Fukui and Doi 1998).
Each year, a large amount of waste is discharged
from agricultural and food processing industries which
represents a potential renewable feedstock for the
125
of controlling the medium composition by substrate
inhibition. A two-stage cultivation process where
firstly, the cells are allowed to multiply to a pre-
determined concentration in a medium having excess
of nutrients followed by their transfer to the second
stage medium with limited nutrient supply exhausting
their carbon reserve to make PHA. During second
stage, the ba ct er ia l cells cannot multiply however,
they increase in size and weight following intracellular
accumulation of PHA as a storage product (Byrom
1987).
Substrates PHA content
(wt %)
Soya waste, malt waste 33-71
Beet molasses, date syrup ~50
Palm oil derivatives, fatty acids, glycerol 22- 70
Castor oil, coconut oil, mustard oil, cottonseed
oil, groundnut oil, olive oil, sesame oil 79-88
Bagasse hydrolysates 54
Crude palm kernel oil, olive oil, sunflower oil,
palm kernel oil, cooking oil, palm olein, crude
palm oil, coconut oil + sodium propionate 65-90
Waste glycerol 50
Palm kernel oil, palm olein, crude palm oil, palm 40-90
acid oil
Soybean oil 6
Palm oil 39
Waste frying oil 29
Coprah oil 63
36
bacteria for PHA production. Different companies i.e.
Proctor and Gamble, Biomers, Metabolix, and several
other have started commercial production of PHA to
make packages for different articles such as shopping
bags, containers, paper coatings, disposable items,
packages for fresh fruits and vegetables etc. (Weiner
1997, Clarinval and Halleux 2005, Mikova and
Chodak 2006).
PHB (Poly-3-hydroxybutyrate) another common
form of PHA produces fibers with high tensile strength
and the tensile strength of low molecular weight fibers
is usually higher than that of high molecular weight
fibers (Tanaka et al. 2007). An extrusion process and
succeeded in improving the crystallization of the fibers
with reduced brittleness and created very strong fibers
with promising applications especially for the moist
and semi moist foods was developed (Vogel et al.
2007). Some of the commercially available bioplastics
along with their specific use in the food industry have
been listed (Table 3).
Bioplastics from petrochemical sources
Polycaprolactone, polyvinylalcohol and
polycaprolactone are made from synthetic (petroleum)
sources, and have seen only limited use, apart from
being used in starch-blends because of its low glass
126 SATISH KUMAR • KS THAKUR

transition and melting temperature of 60ºC. Another
polymer being used in packaging applications is
polyvinylalcohol (PVOH), although its
biodegradability is disputed further, PVOH and starch
blends are so water sensitive that they can in fact be
water soluble. The most widely used water soluble
polymer PVOH is prepared by hydrolysis of
polyvinylacetate. By controlling the hydrolysis of the
starch control over the water soluble nature of the
resulting resin can be established.
CONCLUSION
The durability of plastic packaging is beyond
dispute and is sometimes the most desirable property in
some packaging applications but, many polymers used
for the products having a limited life especially the
food items which are mostly used only once, durability
of the packaging is not always an essential
requirement. Various integrated waste management
practices including recycling, reduction of packaging
waste, composting and incineration are the present
strategies which have been adopted to bring the ill
effects of plastic polymers under control. However,
these measures cannot help to decrease our
dependency on petroleum-based products. One of the
best solutions the scientific community is looking into
is the development and introduction of biodegradable
polymers that will degrade naturally or in controlled
atmosphere into harmless products at the end of their
life cycle. Despite the problems still encountered in
properties and production of biopolymers,
biodegradable packaging is entering the market
because of supermarkets being increasingly tricked by
the marketing effect of a green image. Specific areas in
field of packaging where biodegradability is required
are sacks and bags, foamed trays, cups and cutlery in
the fast food sector, soluble foams for industrial
packaging, film wrapping, laminated paper, foamed
trays which do not require durability.
Recent approach in packaging especially in those
application where the commodity has a limited shelf
life i.e. food items, is to use such novel non-durable
packaging materials like starch-PLA blends, starch-
PCL blends etc. in the form of bottles, jars, cans,
barrels, packaging films, food containers, disposable
cups and coating etc. Many multinational companies
like Novamont, BASF, Biomer, National starch,
DuPont cargil etc. have understood the importance and
potential mind set of people towards the go green
campaign and have started producing biopolymers
based packaging for the food industry. When one looks
at the present market for biodegradable food packaging
materials it is still non-existent compared to
conventional plastics used in packaging reasons being
their high production costs and sometimes their
underperformed properties, but there is still a heap of
opportunities for the industries to develop new
products with specific properties and more research is
required to put these bioplastics in direct applications
for different products.

Table 3 Current applications of bioplastics in the food industry

Packaging application Biopolymer Company Reference
PLA (Polylactic acid )
Coffee and tea Cardboard cups coated with PLA KLM Jager (2010)
Beverages PLA cups Mosburger (Japan) Sudesh and Iwata (2008)
Fresh salads PLA bowls McDonald's Haugaard et al. (2003)
Carbonated water, fresh juices, dairy drinks, PLA bottles Biota, noble Aruas et al. (2003)
Freshly cut fruits, whole fruits, vegetables, Rigid PLA trays and packs Asda (retailer) Koide and Shi (2006)
bakery Jager (2010)
goods, salads
Organic pretzels, potato chips PLA bags Snyder's of Hanover, Weston, 2010
PepsiCo's Frito-lay
Bread Paper bags with PLA window Delhaize (retailer) Delhaize (2007)
Organic poultry PLA bowls, absorb pads Delhaize (retailer) Delhaize (2007)
Starch-based
Milk chocolates Cornstarch trays Cadbury Schweppes Highlights in Bioplastics,
food group, Marks and Website European bioplastics
Spencer
Organic tomatoes Corn-based packaging Iper supermarkets (Italy), Highlights in Bioplastics,
Coop Italia website European bioplastics
Cellulose – based
Kiwi Bio-based trays wrapped Wal-Mart Blakistone and Sand (2007)
with cellulose film
Potato chips Metalized cellulose film Boulder Canyon Website European bioplastics
Organic pasta Cellulose-based packaging Birkel Website European bioplastics
Sweets Metalized cellulose film Qualitystreet,Thornton Website European bioplastics
Journal of Hill Agriculture (Volume 8, No. 2, April – June, 2017)
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Authors are thankful to Dr YS Parmar University
of Horticulture and Forestry, Solan for providing all
facilities and permissions for this work.
REFERENCES
Albertsson AC, Karlsson S 1995. Degradable polymers
of the future. Acta Polymer 46: 114-123.
Albertsson AC, Varma IK 2002. Aliphatic polyesters:
synthesis, properties and applications. Advances in
Polymer Science 157: 1-40.
Albuquerque MGE, Eiroa M, Torres C, Nunes BR,
Reis MAM 2007. Strategies for the development of
a side stream process for polyhydroxyalkanoate
(PHA) production from sugar cane molasses.
Journal of Biotechnology 130: 411-421.
Aruas R, Harte B, Selke S 2003. An overview of
polylactides as packaging materials.
Macromolecular and Bioscience 4(9): 835-864.
ASTM Standards 2011. Standard terminology relating
to plastics. Annual Book of ASTM Standards, Vol
8(1), American Society for Testing and Materials,
West Conshohocken, PA. D883-96.
Avella M, Bonadies E, Martusscelli E, Rimedio R
2001. European current standardization for plastic
packaging recoverable through composting and
biodegradation. Polymer Testing 20: 517-521.
Averous L, Pollet E 2012. Environmental Silicate
Nano-Biocomposites - Green Energy and
Technology. Springer-Verlag, London, pp 1-28.
Averous L 2011. Polylactic acid - synthesis, properties
and applications. In: Monomers, Oligomers,
Polymers and Composites from Renewable
Resources. Belgacem N, Gandini A (eds). Elsevier,
Amsterdam, pp 433-450.
Bigg DM 1996. Effect of copolymer ratio on the
crystallinity and properties of polylactic acid
copolymers. Journal of Engineering and Applied
Sciences 2: 2028-2039.
Bilby GD 2000. Degradable polymers,
www.angelfire.com. Accession July 20, 2016.
Blakistone B, Sand CK 2008. Using sustainable
packaging technologies to respond to consumer,
retailer, and seafood industry needs. In:
International Smoked Seafood Conference
Proceedings, Kramer DE, Brown L (eds), Alaska
Sea Grant College Programme, AK-SG-08-02,
University of Alaska, Fairbanks, AK, pp 75-79.
Byrom D 1987. Polymer synthesis by microorganisms
- technology and economics. Trends in
Biotechnology 5: 246-250.
Chen Y, Ishikawa Y, Zhang Z, Maekawa T 2003.
Mechanical properties of the extruded acetylated
starch plastic filled cellulose acetate and evaluation
127
of its biodegrade properties. ASABE Meeting
Paper No. 036021. St. Joseph, Mich -ASABE.
Choi JI, Lee SY 1997. Process analysis and economic
evaluation for poly (3-hydroxybutyrate) production
by fermentation. Bioprocess Engineering 17: 335-
342
Clarinval AM, Halleux J 2005. Classification of
biodegradable polymers. In: Biodegradable
Polymers for Industrial Applications, Smith R
(ed). CRC, Boca Raton, pp 3-56.
Delhaize 2007. http://www.delhaize.be/_webdata/
pressreleases/_NL/Pr070829-hoevekip%20
bourgognel-nl-sdl% 204.pdf Accessed 21.01.2012
Disha N, Bhawana P, Fulekar MH. 2012. Production of
biodegradable plastic from waste using microbial
technology. International Journal of Research in
Chemistry and Environment 2(2): 118-123.
Eggink G, Wal H, Huijberts GNM, Waard P 1992.
Oleic acid as a substrate for poly-3-
hydroxyalkanoate formation in Alcaligenes
eutrophus and Pseudomonas putida. Industrial
Crops and Products 1: 157-163.
Ellis PR, Cochrane PM, Dale FBM, Duffus CM, Lynn
IMM, Prentice DRM, Swanston SJ, Tiller SA 1998.
Starch production and industrial use. Journal of the
Science of Food and Agriculture 7: 289-311.
Ezeoha SL, Ezenwanne DJN 2013. Production of
biodegradable plastic packaging film from cassava
starch. IOSR Journal of Engineering 3(10): 14-20.
Fukui T, Doi Y 1998. Efficient production of
polyhydroxyalkanoates from plant oils by
Alcaligenes eutrophus and its recombinant strain.
Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology 49: 333-
336.
Garlotta D 2001. A literature review of poly (lactic
acid). Journal of Polymers and Environment 9(2):
63-84.
Grothe E, Moo-Young M, Chisti Y 1999. Fermentation
optimization for the production of poly -
hydroxybutyric acid) microbial thermoplastic.
Enzyme and Microbial Technology 25: 132-141.
Haugaard VK, Udsen AM, Mortensen G, Hoegh L,
Petersen K, Monahan F 2003. Potential food
applications of biobased materials, an EU-
concerted action project. Starch 53(5): 189-200.
Jager A 2010 IngeoTM polylactide een natuurlijke keus.
Presentation given at VMT conference: green
packaging (9/12/2010).
Jogdand SN 1999. Welcome to the world of eco-
friendly plastics, www.members.rediff.com.
Johansson E, Malik AH, Hussain A, Rasheed F,
Newson WR, Plivelic T, Hedenqvist MS, Gallstedt
M, Kuktaite R 2013. Wheat gluten polymer
structures: the impact of genotype, environment,
and processing on their functionality in various
128
applications. Cereal Chemistry Journal 90: 367-
376.
Kaplan DL, Mayer JM, Ball D, McCassie J, Allen AL,
Stenhouse P 1993. Fundamentals of biodegradable
polymers. In: Biodegradable Polymers and
Packaging, Ching C, Kaplan DL, Thomas EL (eds).
Technomic Pub Co, Lancaster. pp 1-42.
Khanna S, Srivastava AK 2005. Recent advances in
microbial polyhydroxyalkanoates. Process
Biochemistry 40: 607-619.
Koide S, Shi J 2006. Microbial and quality evaluation
of green peppers stored in biodegradable film
packaging. Food Control 18: 1121–1125.
Kuktaite R, Ture H, Hedenqvist MS, Gallstedt M,
Plivelic TS 2014. Gluten biopolymer and nanoclay-
derived structures in wheat gluten–urea–clay
composites: relation to barrier and mechanical
properties. ACS Sustainable Chemistry and
Engineering 2: 1439-1445.
Lageveen RG, Huisman GW, Preusting H, Ketelaar P,
Eggink G, Witholt B 1988. Formation of polyesters
by Pseudomonas oleovorans: Effect of substrates
on formation and composition of poly-(R)-3-
hydroxyalkanoates and poly-(R)-3-
hydroxyalkenoates. Applied and Environmental
Microbiology 54: 2924-2932.
Lee SY 1996. Plastic from bacteria - progress and
prospects for polyhydroxyalkanoate production in
bacteria. Trends in Biotechnology 14: 431-438.
Lim, S, Jane J, Rajagopalan S, Seib P 1992. Effect of
starch granule size on physical properties of starch-
filled polyethylene film. Biotechnology Progress 8:
51-57.
Lunt J 1998. Large-scale production, properties and
commercial applications of polylactic acid
polymers. Polymer Degradation and Stability 59(1-
3): 145-152.
Luzier WD 1992. Materials derived from biomass
biodegradable materials. Proceedings of the
National Academy of Sciences of the United States
of America 89: 839-842.
Mali S, Grossmann MVE, Garcia MA, Martino MN,
Zaritzky NE 2002. Microstrucural characterization
of yam starch films. Carbohydrate Polymers 50:
379-386.
Mikova G, Chodak I 2006. Properties and modification
of poly (3-hydroxybutanoate). Chemicke Listy 100:
1075-1083.
Muneer F, Johansson E, Hedenqvist MS, Gällstedt M,
Newson WR 2014. Preparation, properties, protein
cross-linking and biodegradability of plasticizer-
solvent free hemp fibre reinforced wheat gluten,
glutenin, and gliadin composites. Bio-Resources 9:
5246-5261.
Narayan R 2001. Drivers for biodegradable/
compostable plastics and role of composting in
SATISH KUMAR • KS THAKUR
waste management and sustainable agriculture.
Orbit Journal 1(1): 1-9.
Nielsen LE, Landel RF 1994. Mechanical Properties of
Polymers and Composite, 2nd edn. Marcel Dekker
Inc., New York.
Okada M 2002. Chemical syntheses of biodegradable
polymers. Progress in Polymer Science (Oxford)
27(1): 87-133.
Olabarrieta I, Cho SW, Gallstedt M, Sarasua JR,
Johansson E, Hedenqvist MS 2006. Aging
properties of films of plasticized vital wheat gluten
cast from acidic and basic solutions.
Biomacromolecules 7: 1657-1664.
Raija A 2003 Novel Food Packaging Techniques.
Woodhead Pub Ltd, Abington Cambridge.
Reddy CSK, Rashmi RG, Kalia VC 2003.
Polyhydroxyalkanoates - an overview. Bioresource
Technology 87: 137-146.
Reiter WD 2002. Biosynthesis and properties of the
plant cell wall. Current Opinion in Plant Biology
5(6): 536–542.
Rouilly A, Rigal L 2002. Agro-materials - a
bibliographic review. Journal of Macromolecular
Science, Part C. Polymer Reviews 42(4): 441-479.
Schubert P, Steinbüchel A, Schlegel HG 1988. Cloning
of the Alcaligenes eutrophus genes for synthesis of
poly-beta-hydroxybutyric acid (PHB) and synthesis
of PHB in Escherichia coli. Journal of Bacteriology
170: 5837-5847.
Sinclair RG 1996. The case for polylactic acid as a
commodity packaging plastic. Journal of
Macromolecular Science 33(5): 585-597.
Song JH, Murphy RJ, Narayan R, Davies GBH 2009.
Biodegradable and compostable alternatives to
conventional plastics. Philosophical Transactions of
the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 364:
2127-2139.
Sriroth K, Chollakup R, Piyachomkwan K, Christopher
G 2014. Biodegradable plastics from cassava starch
in Thailand. National Center for Genetic
Engineering and Biotechnology (BIOTEC),
Bangkok, Thailand, pp 1-21.
Steinbuchel A, Doi Y 2002. Biopolymers - Polyesters
III- Applications and Commercial Products. Vol 4,
Wiley-VCH, Weinheim.
Sudesh K, Iwata T 2008. Sustainability of biobased
and biodegradable plastics. Clean Soil Air Water
36 (5-6): 433-442.
Tanaka T, Yabe T, Teramachi S, Iwata T 2007.
Mechanical properties and enzymatic degradation
of poly [(K)-3-hydroxybutyrate] fibers stretched
after isothermal crystallization. Polymer
Degradation and Stability 92: 1016-1024.
Thunwall MA, Rigdahl M 2006. Extrusion processing
of high amylase potato starch materials.
Carbohydrate Polymer 11: 419-428.
 Journal of Hill Agriculture (Volume 8, No. 2, April – June, 2017)
Urbaniak W 2004. Thermal recycling - to burn or not
to burn used packages? In: Proceedings of 2 nd
Scientific-Instructive Conference on Packaging and
Environment Protection. Arka Konsorcjum SA
(eds , pp 107-122.
Van VK, Kiekens P 2002. Biopolymers: overview of
several properties and consequences on their
applications. Polymer Testing 21(4): 433-442.
Vert M, Schwarch G, Coudane J 1995. Present and
future of PLA polymers. Journal of
Macromolecular Science 32(4): 787-796.
Vogel R, Tandler B, Voigt D, Jehnichen D, Haussler L,
Peitzsch L, Brunig H 2007. Melt spinning of
bacterial aliphatic polyester using reactive
extrusion for improvement of crystallization.
Macromolecular Biosciences 7: 820-828.
Weiner RM 1997. Biopolymers from marine
prokaryotes. Trends in Biotechnology 15: 390-394.
View publication stats
129
Weston S 2010. Packaging- assessing its
environmental credentials. http://www. foodbev.
com/ article / packaging – assessing – its-enviro
nmental–credentials. Accessed Oct 10, 2012.
Widmer J 2003. Recycling of plastics, what to do? -
some economic and social best practice aspects. In:
1st International Symposium on Environmental
Management, Zagreb.
Wieser H 2007. Chemistry of gluten proteins. Food
Microbiology 24: 115-119.
Willett JL 1994. Mechanical properties of
LDPE/granular starch composites. Journal of
Applied Polymer Science 54 (11): 1685-1695.
Yu J 2007. Microbial production of bioplastics from
renewable resources. In: Bioprocessing for Value-
Added Products from Renewable Resources, Yang
ST (ed). Elservier BV, Amsterdam, pp. 585–610.