Cited by 851Natural Fiber Reinforced Compositesbiodegradable polymer synthesis and propertiesAdvanced Cellulose Research Studies

Mechanical properties of biodegradable composites from poly lactic acid (PLA) and microcrystalline cellulose (MCC)

Mathew, Aji P., Oksman, Kristiina, Sain, Mohini·2005·Journal of Applied Polymer Science

Abstract

Biodegradable composites were prepared using microcrystalline cellulose (MCC) as the reinforcement and polylactic acid (PLA) as a matrix. PLA is polyester of lactic acid and MCC is cellulose derived from high quality wood pulp by acid hydrolysis to remove the amorphous regions. The composites were prepared with different MCC contents, up to 25 wt %, and wood flour (WF) and wood pulp (WP) were used as reference materials. Generally, the MCC/PLA composites showed lower mechanical properties compared to the reference materials. The dynamic mechanical thermal analysis (DMTA) showed that the storage modulus was increased with the addition of MCC. The X‐ray diffraction (XRD) studies on the materials showed that the composites were less crystalline than the pure components. However, the scanning electron microscopy (SEM) study of materials showed that the MCC was remaining as aggregates of crystalline cellulose fibrils, which explains the poor mechanical properties. Furthermore, the fracture surfaces of MCC composites were indicative of poor adhesion between MCC and the PLA matrix. Biodegradation studies in compost soil at 58°C showed that WF composites have better biodegradability compared to WP and MCC composites. The composite performances are expected to improve by separation of the cellulose aggregates to microfibrils and with improved adhesion. © 2005 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Appl Polym Sci 97: 2014–2025, 2005

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/app.21779

Cites

38 of 38 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • New chain extenders can replace esterification adjuvants, but chain extenders and polymer impurities are toxic and nonbiodegradable.

    “Although later studies found that new chain extenders could replace the esterification of the above-mentioned adjuvants, there is still the problem that chain extenders and polymer impurities are toxic and nonbiodegradable [41].”

    From Synthesis and Biological Application of Polylactic Acid (2020) · cites this paper as [41]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Mathew, A. P., Oksman, K., & Sain, M.
Affiliations
  • Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NO)
  • University of Toronto (CA)
Corresponding author
Oksman, Kristiina
Venue
Journal of Applied Polymer Science
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2005-06-23
Volume
97
Issue
5
Pages
2014-2025
ISSN
  • 0021-8995 (ISSN-L)
  • 1097-4628
OpenAlex
W2076658816
Cited by
851
References
38
Citations by year
2026: 22 · 2025: 32 · 2024: 44 · 2023: 42 · 2022: 51 · 2021: 54 · 2020: 70 · 2019: 65 · 2018: 56 · 2017: 54 · 2016: 66 · 2015: 45 · 2014: 53 · 2013: 53 · 2012: 35
FWCI
9.30
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Journal of Applied Polymer Science (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Materials Science › Polymers and Plastics › Natural Fiber Reinforced Composites
  • Physical Sciences › Materials Science › Biomaterials › biodegradable polymer synthesis and properties
  • Physical Sciences › Materials Science › Biomaterials › Advanced Cellulose Research Studies
Keywords
biodegradable composites, polylactic acid, microcrystalline cellulose, mechanical properties, wood flour, wood pulp, storage modulus, crystallinity, interfacial adhesion, biodegradation, compost soil

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review