Transcript
Page 1: Louise SAIDI Nanocompósitos de celulose bacteriana/poli(N

I

Universidade de Aveiro

Ano 2015

Departamento de Química

Louise SAIDI

Nanocompósitos de celulose bacteriana/poli(N-metacriloil

glicina) preparados por polimerização in situ para aplicações

biomédicas

Page 2: Louise SAIDI Nanocompósitos de celulose bacteriana/poli(N

II

(noROM

Universidade de Aveiro

Ano 2015

Departamento de Química

Louise SAIDI

Nanocompósitos de celulose bacteriana/poli(N-metacriloil

glicina) preparados por polimerização in situ para aplicações

biomédicas

Bacterial cellulose / poly(N-methacryloyl glycine)

nanocomposites prepared by in situ polymerization for

biomedical applications

Tese apresentada à Universidade de Aveiro para cumprimento dos requisitos necessários à

obtenção do grau de Mestre em “Ciências e Engenharia de Materiais”, realizada sob a orientação

científica da Doutora Carmen Sofia da Rocha Freire Barros, Investigadora Principal do CICECO

e do Departamento de Química da Universidade de Aveiro e da Doutora Carla Andreia Cunha

Vilela, Investigadora de Pós-Doutoramento do CICECO e do Departamento de Química da

Universidade de Aveiro

Page 3: Louise SAIDI Nanocompósitos de celulose bacteriana/poli(N

III

O júri

Presidente Prof. Ana Margarida Madeira Viegas de Barros Timmons Assistant professor, Department of Chemistry, University of Aveiro

Prof. Jorge Fernando Jordão Coelho Assistant Professor, Department of Chemical Engineering, University of Coimbra

Doutora Carmen Sofia da Rocha Freire Barros Principal Researcher, CICECO/Department of Chemistry, University of Aveiro

Page 4: Louise SAIDI Nanocompósitos de celulose bacteriana/poli(N

IV

Agradecimentos First I want to thank professor Carmen Freire, my supervisor, for giving me the chance to

have an internship in her team and Carla Vilela for working with me. I thank both of them

a lot for everything they taught me, their help and their availability.

I would also like to express gratitude towards professor Silvestre for his advice and

availability and professor Barros for her support.

Second, I also thank Ana, Andreia, Helena, Maryam, Nuno, Rosário and Ricardo for their

kindness and help during the different tests I have made.

Third, I would like to thank, Antoine, Diana, Hannes, Joanna, Manon, Mathieu and all the

other colleagues from Erasmus or FAME, for the support and the fun, and especially

Antoine and Diana for working next to me during those 5 months.

Finally, thanks also to all the others members of the group I have met for accepting me in

their teams.

Page 5: Louise SAIDI Nanocompósitos de celulose bacteriana/poli(N

V

Palavras-chave

Celulose bacteriana, poly(N-metacriloil glicina), polimerização in situ, nanocompósitos, libertação

de fármacos, biomineralização

Resumo

A celulose é o polissacarídeo mais abundante na terra, e é o principal constituinte das

paredes celulares das plantas. Contudo, também é produzida por bactérias numa forma

mais pura chamada “celulosa bacteriana” (BC). A BC é já bem conhecida e é utilizada em

vários campos principalmente devido à sua estrutura 3D que lhe confere excelentes

propriedades, nomeadamente elevada capacidade de retenção de água, elevada porosidade

e excelente desempenho mecânico. A BC é também, biodegradável e, biocompatível. Em

termos de aplicações, a BC é amplamente usada na área biomédica na forma pura ou de

nanocompósitos como vaso sanguíneos artificiais, sistemas para libertação controlada de

fármacos e na engenharia de tecidos, etc.

Este trabalho relata o desenvolvimento de novos nanocompósitos de celulose bacteriana e

poli(N-metacriliol glicina) preparados por polimerização radicalar in situ usando N,N-

methylenebis(acrylamide) (MBA) como agente reticulante. Foram preparados e

caracterizados vários nanocompósitos com quantidades variáveis de polímero e BC. Os

materiais nanocompósitos obtidos apresentaram propriedades mecânicas e térmicas

melhoradas assim como valores de cristalinidade superiores quando comparados com o

polímero puro. A citotoxicidade (teste MTT) dos nanocompósitos em relação às celulas da

pele (HaCaT) foi também avaliada e os resultados demonstraram que as membranas não

são citotóxicas até 48 horas de exposição. Finalmente, foram testadas duas potenciais

aplicações para os materiais obtidos, nomeadamente como sistemas de libertação de

fármacos e como suportes para a regeneração óssea. Neste sentido, as membranas foram

impregnadas com um fármaco, o diclofenac, e estudada a sua dissolução em condições de

pH diferentes (pH 7.4 e 2.1) a 37 ºC durante 24h. No entanto, verificou-se que durante a

libertação do fármaco ocorreu também a dissolução do polímero. Em segundo lugar, as

membranas foram biomineralizadas com o objectivo de crescer partículas de hidroxiapatite

na sua superfície para potencial aplicação na regeneração óssea. Contudo, o crescimento

destas nanopatículas não foi confirmado por XRD e SEM.

Page 6: Louise SAIDI Nanocompósitos de celulose bacteriana/poli(N

VI

Keywords

Bacterial cellulose, poly(N-methacryloyl glycine), nanocomposites, in situ polymerization, drug

delivery, biomineralization

Abstract

Cellulose is the most abundant polysaccharide on earth, it is the main structural component

of plant cell walls. However, it is also produced by bacteria in a purer form called bacterial

cellulose (BC). BC is well known and mainly used in several field for its peculiar 3D

network that confers to it outstanding properties such as water high holding capacity, high

porosity and excellent mechanical properties. BC is also biodegradable and biocompatible.

Among the different fields of application, BC is greatly used, in its pure form or in the

form of nanocomposites, in the biomedical field, as artificial blood vessels, controlled drug

delivery systems, and in tissue engineering, etc.

The present study reports the development of new nanocomposites made from BC and an

acrylate polymer namely the poly(N-methacryloyl glycine) (PMGly) through an in situ free

radical polymerization using N,N-methylenebis(acrylamide) (MBA) as cross linker agent.

Several nanocomposites with different amounts of polymer and BC were prepared and

characterized. The obtained nanocomposites displayed improved mechanical properties,

thermal stability and crystallinity when compared to the homopolymer. Moreover, their

cytotoxicity (MTT tests) in regard to HaCaT skin cells was also evaluated, and the results

showed that the new nanocomposites were not cytotoxic until 48 hours of exposure.

Finally, two different potential applications were tested for these materials, namely as

systems for drug release and as scaffolds for bone regeneration. First, the membranes were

tested as drug delivery system for diclofenac. The impregnation of the drug into the

membrane was successfully assessed and the drug dissolution was studied for different pH

values (pH 7.4 and 2.1) at 37 ºC during 24 hours. However, the drug release was always

accompanied by polymer dissolution. Secondly, the membranes were immersed in a

simulated body solution in order to grow hydroxyapatite particles on their surface, aiming

an application in bone tissue engineering. However, this growth wasn’t detected by XRD

and SEM analysis.

Page 7: Louise SAIDI Nanocompósitos de celulose bacteriana/poli(N

Bacterial cellulose /poly (N-methacryloyl glycine) prepared by in situ polymerization for biomedical applications 1/56

Table of Contents

1. The context ......................................................................................................................................... 7

2. Introduction ....................................................................................................................................... 8

2.1 BACTERIAL CELLULOSE ............................................................................................................. 10

2.1.1 Bacterial cellulose production .............................................................................................. 10

2.1.2 Bacterial cellulose properties ............................................................................................... 12

2.2 BACTERIAL CELLULOSE APPLICATIONS ...................................................................................... 14

2.3 BC/POLYMER NANOCOMPOSITES ............................................................................................... 15

2.3.1 BC nanocomposites prepared by blending ........................................................................... 15

2.3.2 BC nanocomposites made by modifying the culture medium ............................................... 16

2.3.3 BC nanocomposites prepared by diffusion of a polymer solution into the BC membrane ... 18

2.3.4 BC nanocomposites prepared by in situ polymerization ...................................................... 18

3. Materials and methods .................................................................................................................... 22

3.1 CHEMICALS ............................................................................................................................... 22

3.2 BC MEMBRANES ........................................................................................................................ 22

3.3 BC_PMGLY NANOCOMPOSITES ................................................................................................ 22

3.4 DRUG DELIVERY ASSAYS ........................................................................................................... 23

3.5 BIOMINERALIZATION OF THE NANOCOMPOSITES ....................................................................... 24

3.6 NANOCOMPOSITES CHARACTERIZATION .................................................................................... 24

3.6.1 Fourier Transform Infrared spectroscopy (FTIR) ................................................................ 24

3.6.2 X-Ray Diffraction (XRD) ...................................................................................................... 24

3.6.3 Scanning Electron Microscopy (SEM) ................................................................................. 25

3.6.4 Thermogravimetric Analysis (TGA)...................................................................................... 25

3.6.5 Dynamical Mechanical Analysis (DMA) .............................................................................. 25

3.6.6 Mechanical tests ................................................................................................................... 25

3.6.7 Swelling ratio (SR)................................................................................................................ 25

3.6.8 MTT test ................................................................................................................................ 26

4. Results and Discussion .................................................................................................................... 28

4.1 FOURIER TRANSFORM INFRARED SPECTROSCOPY (FTIR) .......................................................... 30

4.2 X-RAY DIFFRACTION (XRD) ..................................................................................................... 31

4.3 SCANNING ELECTRON MICROSCOPY (SEM) .............................................................................. 32

4.4 THERMOGRAVIMETRIC ANALYSIS (TGA) .................................................................................. 33

4.5 DYNAMIC MECHANICAL ANALYSIS (DMA) .............................................................................. 35

4.6 TENSILE TESTS ........................................................................................................................... 36

4.7 SWELLING RATIO ....................................................................................................................... 37

4.8 MTT TEST.................................................................................................................................. 39

Page 8: Louise SAIDI Nanocompósitos de celulose bacteriana/poli(N

Bacterial cellulose /poly (N-methacryloyl glycine) prepared by in situ polymerization for biomedical applications 2/56

4.9 DRUG DELIVERY ESSAYS ........................................................................................................... 42

4.10 BIOMINERALIZATION OF THE NANOCOMPOSITES ....................................................................... 45

4.10.1 X-ray diffraction ............................................................................................................... 46

4.10.2 Scanning electron microscopy.......................................................................................... 47

5. Conclusions....................................................................................................................................... 50

6. References......................................................................................................................................... 51

Page 9: Louise SAIDI Nanocompósitos de celulose bacteriana/poli(N

Bacterial cellulose /poly (N-methacryloyl glycine) prepared by in situ polymerization for biomedical applications 3/56

List of Figures Figure 1 - Cellulose repeating unit. ............................................................................................................. 8

Figure 2 - Cellulose chains with the hydrogen bondings. [4] ...................................................................... 8

Figure 3 - Cellulose fibrillar structure: a) cellulose fibers, b) macrofibers, c) microfibers, and d)

cellulose chains. [6] ..................................................................................................................................... 9

Figure 4 - Cellulose allomorphs Iα(left) and Iβ (right), Carbon ● Oxygen ○ and Hyrdrogen ◦ atoms.[7] ... 9

Figure 5 - SEM image of Gluconacetobacter xylinus bacteria.[2] ............................................................ 10

Figure 6 - BC membrane produced in stationary culture (left) and BC pellets produced in agitated culture

(right).[2] ................................................................................................................................................... 10

Figure 7- Rotary disk reactor [15] (left); Horizontal lift reactor [4] (right). ............................................ 11

Figure 8 - SEM micrographs of bacterial cellulose surface [25] (left) and cross section [2] (right). ....... 12

Figure 9 - Electron micrographs of plant cellulose fibers (left) and bacterial cellulose (right).[26] ........ 13

Figure 10 - a) Nata de coco; b) BC artificial blood vessel;[32] c) BC as wound healing membranes.[16]

.................................................................................................................................................................... 14

Figure 11 - Young modulus (a) and tensile strength (b) of corn starch thermoplastic composites

reinforced with 1% and 5% of bacterial and vegetable cellulose.[53] ...................................................... 16

Figure 12 - DSC thermograms illustrating the determination of the glass transition and melting

temperatures in the nanocomposite (left) and the variation in the melting endotherm of PEO as a function

of the BC/PEO w/w ratio (right).[55] ........................................................................................................ 17

Figure 13 - Light transmittance of (a) bacterial cellulose pellicle, (b) PLLA/bacterial ............................ 18

Figure 14 - SEM micrographs of the cross section of BC/PS nanocomposites.[45] .................................. 19

Figure 15 – Visual aspects of BC/PHEMA/PEGDA (left) and SEM cross sections images (right)[62] .... 20

Figure 16 - Photograph of BC – poly(HEMA-co-EOEMA) composite in the swollen state.[63] ............... 21

Figure 17 - Diagram of the various stages of the polymerization reaction.[65] ........................................ 21

Figure 18 - Contact angle of a water droplet over (a) pristine BC, (b) BC-g-PMMA, and (c) BC-g-

PBA.[65] .................................................................................................................................................... 21

Figure 19 - Schematic representation of the MGly free radical polymerization reaction using MBA as a

cross-linker and AAPH as thermal initiator. .............................................................................................. 29

Figure 20 - Visual aspects of a) dry BC, b) dry and c) wet nanocomposite (BC_PMGly 1:3). .................. 29

Figure 21 - FTIR-ATR spectra of native BC, PMGly and BC_PMGly nanocomposites with different

compositions. .............................................................................................................................................. 31

Figure 22 - Diffractograms of pure BC, PMGly, and BC_PMGly nanocomposites. ................................. 32

Figure 23 - SEM surface and cross-section micrographs of BC (left), BC_PMGly (1:1) (middle) and

BC_PMGly (1:3) (right). Surface images are on the first two rows with magnifications of x10k and x30k

and cross-section images are on the last two rows with magnifications of x3.50k and x15k. .................... 33

Figure 24 - Thermograms and the corresponding derivatives of BC, PMGly, and BC_PMGly

nanocomposites. ......................................................................................................................................... 35

Figure 25 - Storage modulus and tan δ in function of the temperature of BC and BC nanocomposites

obtained by DMA analysis in tension mode. The tan δ curves were smoothed with Origin. ...................... 36

Page 10: Louise SAIDI Nanocompósitos de celulose bacteriana/poli(N

Bacterial cellulose /poly (N-methacryloyl glycine) prepared by in situ polymerization for biomedical applications 4/56

Figure 26 - Tensile stress, Young’s modulus and elongation at break comparison in function of the

sample. a) Comparison between BC and the nanocomposites, b) Comparison only between the

nanocomposites. ......................................................................................................................................... 37

Figure 27 - Swelling ratios of BC, and BC_PMGly nanocomposites; Logarithmic fitting was applied with

Excel. .......................................................................................................................................................... 38

Figure 28 - FTIR spectra of the BC_PMGly 1:3 nanocomposite before and after the swelling tests. ....... 38

Figure 29 - Preparation of the extract, 6 cm² membranes dissolved in DMEM media. ............................. 39

Figure 30 - Visual aspects of the a) PMGly extract, and b) (from left to right) BC, BC-PMGly 1:1,

BC_PMGly 1:3 extracts. ............................................................................................................................ 39

Figure 31 - 96 wells plate with the cell and the extract before incubation. ............................................... 40

Figure 32 - 96 wells plate after 24 hours incubation and 4 hours incubation with MTT ........................... 40

Figure 33 – Effects of BC, BC_PMGly 1:1, 1:3 and PMGly on the HaCaT cells for exposure time of 24h,

48h and 72h. The results are presented as mean +/- standard deviation from 4 different specimens per

membrane. Symbol * represents significant difference between time of exposure for the same membrane

(p<0.05). Different letters represent significant differences between one membrane and the control, or

one membrane and another membrane for each exposure time (p<0.05). ................................................. 41

Figure 34 - Diclofenac chemical structure. ................................................................................................ 42

Figure 35 - Visual aspect of the dried BC_PMGly1:3_DCF membrane after the impregnation of the drug.

.................................................................................................................................................................... 42

Figure 36 - FTIR-ATR spectra of BC, PMGly, DCF and BC_PMGly1:3_DCF. ....................................... 43

Figure 37 - Comparison of the absorbance evolution in function of time at pH 7.4 and 2.1 for the BC

_PMGly (1:3)_DCF and BC_PMGly (1:3:10)_DCF nanocomposites; fitting was computed with Excel. 44

Figure 38 - FTIR-ATR spectra of BC and BC_PMGly1:3_DCF before and after release test at different

pH (7.4 and 2.1) with different amount of cross linker (5% and 10%) ...................................................... 45

Figure 39 - XRD diffractograms of the different biomineralized nanocomposites. .................................... 47

Figure 40 - SEM pictures of a) BC-PMGly 1-2_FDFD, b) BC_PMGly 1:2_FDOD, c) BC_PMGly

1:2_WFD, d) BC_PMGly 1:2 WOD at a magnification of x10k ................................................................ 48

Figure 41 - SEM pictures of a) BC-PMGly 1-2_FDFD, b) BC_PMGly 1:2_FDOD, c) BC_PMGly

1:2_WFD, d) BC_PMGly 1:2 WOD at a magnification of x30k ................................................................ 48

Figure 42 – Typical EDX spectrum obtained with the BC-PMGly 1:2_FDFD nanocomposite ................. 49

Page 11: Louise SAIDI Nanocompósitos de celulose bacteriana/poli(N

Bacterial cellulose /poly (N-methacryloyl glycine) prepared by in situ polymerization for biomedical applications 5/56

List of Tables

Table 1- Comparison of bacterial and plant cellulose fibers properties. ................................................... 13

Table 2: List of the prepared membranes with their compositions ............................................................ 23

Table 3: Nanocomposites’ designation and compositions prepared for drug release ............................... 23

Table 4: Effective Polymer/BC ratio, polymerization yield, and thickness of the different nanocomposites.

The thickness was average from 4 different samples per membranes. ....................................................... 29

Table 5 : Schematic representation of the plate ......................................................................................... 40

Table 6: Designation of the different biomineralized samples ................................................................... 46

Table 7: List of the different elements and their concentrations found in the nanocomposites, the

concentrations are given in wt%. The 2 main compounds (besides carbon and oxygen) of the samples are

highlighted in grey. ..................................................................................................................................... 49

Page 12: Louise SAIDI Nanocompósitos de celulose bacteriana/poli(N

Bacterial cellulose /poly (N-methacryloyl glycine) prepared by in situ polymerization for biomedical applications 6/56

List of Abbreviations

AAPH 2,2′-Azobis(2-methylpropionamidine) dihydrochloride

AIBN Azodiisobutyronitrile

ATRP Atom transfer radical polymerization

BC Bacterial cellulose

BC_PMGly Bacterial cellulose _ Poly(N-methacryloyl glycine) nanocomposite

BiBBR 2-Bromoisobutyryl bromide

BM Biomineralization

DBSA Dodecylbenzenylsulfonic acid

DCF Diclofenac

DMA Dynamical Mechanical Analysis

DMEM Dulbecco′s Modified Eagle′s Medium

DMSO Dimethyl sulfoxide

DP Degree of polymerization

FTIR-ATR Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy - Attenuated total reflection

Gly Glycine

HAp Hydroxyapatite

HS Hestrin- Schramm medium

MBA N,N'-Methylenebisacrylamide

MC Methacryloyl chloride

MGly N-methacryloyl glycine

MTT 3-(4, 5-Dimethylthiazolyl-2)-2, 5-diphenyltetrazolium bromide or

thiozolyl blue tetrazolium bromide

NMR Nuclear magnetic resonance

PBA Poly(n-butyl acrylate)

PBS Phosphate buffer solution

PCL Poly(caprolactone)

PEG Poly(ethylene glycol)

PEGDA Poly(ethylene glycol) diacrylate

PEH Poly(2-ethylhexyl acrylate)

PEO Poly(ethylene oxide)

PEOEMA Poly(2-ethoxyethyl methacrylate)

PET Poly(ethylene terephthalate)

PHEMA Poly(2-hydroxyethyl methacrylate)

PLA Poly(L-lactic acid)

PMGly Poly(N-methacryloyl glycine)

PMMA Poly(methylmetacrylate)

PNVP Poly(N-vinyl pyrrolidone)

PVA Poly(vinyl alcohol)

RAFT Reversible addition-fragmentation chain transfer

SBF Simulated body solution

SEM Scanning electron microscopy

TGA Thermogravimetric analysis

TPS Thermoplastic starch

Page 13: Louise SAIDI Nanocompósitos de celulose bacteriana/poli(N

Bacterial cellulose /poly (N-methacryloyl glycine) prepared by in situ polymerization for biomedical applications 7/56

1. The context

At the time where high interest is devoted to the development of new technologies and materials

in order to improve life quality, novel high performance health care products are one of the most

important focus of scientists. Specifically, advanced medical textiles and devices are topics of

large interest and fast development due to their importance in different fields such as wound

healing, implantable medical devices, bandaging, surgery, controlled drug delivery, etc. On the

other hand, increasing attention and huge efforts have been dedicated to the creation of new

environmentally friendly and sustainable materials.

In this context, the present thesis will focus on the development and the characterization of

novel bacterial cellulose (BC) based nanocomposites prepared by the in situ free radical

polymerization of adequate monomers for potential application in the biomedical field, for

example as drug delivery systems or for bone tissue engineering.

Several studies have shown the potentiality to prepare innovative bio-based nanocomposites

with distinct properties by combining bacterial cellulose with different natural or synthetic

polymers using diverse methodologies. Indeed, BC is known for its peculiar 3D structure that

confers to it high mechanical properties and high water retention ability and is also used in

several medical fields due to its non-cytotoxicity and biodegradability. Additionally, the

selection of the polymer and the corresponding methodology used to perform the

polymerization strongly influence the final properties of the nanocomposites. In this study, the

aim is to create a new bacterial cellulose based nanocomposite by combination with an acrylate

polymer with amino-acid like moieties, namely poly(N-methacryloyl glycine), by means of in

situ free radical polymerization of N-methacryloyl glycine. This new material is expected to

present improved mechanical properties and biological activity as biocompatibility. In a final

instance, the objective of this work is to use this novel nanocomposite for biomedical

applications such as for instance drug delivery, or for bone tissue engineering, therefore the

possibility to induce biological activity to the BC membranes is very pertinent.

The present manuscript will be divided into four main parts. An introduction, describing BC’s

production, properties and main applications, followed by a brief review of BC /polymer

nanocomposites, with particular emphasis on nanocomposites prepared by in situ

polymerization approaches. The second part will described the material and methods involved

in the synthesis and characterisation of the new nanocomposites, as well as in the assessment of

the future potential applications of the nanocomposites. It will, finally, be followed by a chapter

describing the obtained results and the main conclusions of the work.

Page 14: Louise SAIDI Nanocompósitos de celulose bacteriana/poli(N

Bacterial cellulose /poly (N-methacryloyl glycine) prepared by in situ polymerization for biomedical applications 8/56

2. Introduction

Cellulose is the most abundant biopolymer on earth and was discovered in 1838 by Anselm

Payen. This biopolymer is the main component of plant cell walls but it can be also produced by

several other organisms, including algae, plankton and bacteria.[1] It can be also produced

through enzymatic and chemical methods.[2]

From a chemical point of view, cellulose is a polysaccharide composed of glucose units linked

by β(1-4) glycosidic bonds.[3] It is this type of chemical bonding that confers to cellulose its

linear structure. The repeating unit of a cellulose chain is represented in Figure 1.

Figure 1 - Cellulose repeating unit.

Plant cellulose is typically associated with other plant cell wall constituents, such as

hemicelluloses, pectins and lignin, and is characterized by a fibrillar structure, composed of

crystalline and amorphous regions, resulting from the high tendency of cellulose chains to

establish intra- and intermolecular hydrogen bonds (Figure 2) that promote their aggregation.

Those hydrogen bonds are also responsible for the high mechanical strength, high crystallinity

degree of cellulose [4] and insolubility in most common solvents.

Figure 2 - Cellulose chains with the hydrogen bondings. [4]

As shown in the Figure 3, cellulose fibers are composed of macrofibers, themselves composed

of bundles of microfibers; that are aggregates of several cellulose chains. Plant cellulose

macrofibers can vary from 5 to 30 μm in diameter and approximately from 1 to 25 mm in

length. For instance, cotton stalks have a length of 0.83 mm and a diameter of 19.6 μm. [5]

Page 15: Louise SAIDI Nanocompósitos de celulose bacteriana/poli(N

Bacterial cellulose /poly (N-methacryloyl glycine) prepared by in situ polymerization for biomedical applications 9/56

Figure 3 - Cellulose fibrillar structure: a) cellulose fibers, b) macrofibers, c) microfibers, and d)

cellulose chains. [6]

The crystalline structure of cellulose is quite complex because cellulose can exist in different

polymorphs, specifically cellulose I, II, III and IV. Native cellulose commonly presents the

cellulose I crystalline structure.[4] Moreover, due to some variations on the hydrogen bonding

between cellulose chains, different cellulose allomorphs can be observed. For example,

cellulose I has two allomorphs named Iα and Iβ as represented in Figure 4.

Figure 4 - Cellulose allomorphs Iα(left) and Iβ (right), Carbon ● Oxygen ○ and Hyrdrogen ◦

atoms.[7]

The degree of polymerization (DP) of cellulose varies in function of its sources, biosynthesis

process and purification or modification treatments. Typically, native cellulose DP is between

3000 and 15000: wood cellulose has a DP of about 10000 and cotton cellulose, the most pure

form of cellulose, of 15000. Purification treatments normally induce a reduction of the degree of

polymerization.[8]

This quite complex structure confers to cellulose properties such as hydrophilicity,

biodegradability, stiffness, and the ability to be chemically modified. [9]

Page 16: Louise SAIDI Nanocompósitos de celulose bacteriana/poli(N

Bacterial cellulose /poly (N-methacryloyl glycine) prepared by in situ polymerization for biomedical applications 10/56

2.1 Bacterial cellulose

Bacterial cellulose (BC) was first identified in 1886 by A. J. Brown. It is produced by bacteria

in two main steps, namely the synthesis of uridine diphosphoglucose, and then its

polymerization into β-1-4-glucan chains.[10]

Among the bacteria capable of producing BC, the gram negative Gluconacetobacter xylinus

(previously known as Acetobacter xylinum) is recognized as the most effective producer. G.

xylinus (Figure 5) is a non-pathogenic, rod-shaped bacterium that produces cellulose from

several carbon and nitrogen sources.[3]

Figure 5 - SEM image of Gluconacetobacter xylinus bacteria.[2]

2.1.1 Bacterial cellulose production

BC can be produced in both static and agitated cultures. In stationary cultures, BC is obtained as

an accumulation of a gelatinous membrane on the interface between the air and the culture

medium[11] (Figure 6, left), whereas in agitated cultures, it is synthesized in a deep medium in

the form of fibrous suspensions, pellets or irregular masses (Figure 6, right). [12]

Figure 6 - BC membrane produced in stationary culture (left) and BC pellets produced in agitated

culture (right).[2]

Page 17: Louise SAIDI Nanocompósitos de celulose bacteriana/poli(N

Bacterial cellulose /poly (N-methacryloyl glycine) prepared by in situ polymerization for biomedical applications 11/56

Bacterial cellulose made from agitated and static cultures presents a similar network structure;

however, BC produced in agitated culture shows a lower degree of polymerization, crystallinity

index and Young's modulus.[13] It has been also shown [14] that BC prepared in agitated

conditions is characterized by a lower Iα mass fraction than cellulose produced statically. A

decrease of the cellulose fibrils size has also been observed in agitated culture when compared

to static counterpart.

Static cultivation allows the control of the shape and size of the BC pellicles and also permits to

obtain homogeneous membranes.[2] These properties are very well appreciated in the

biomedical field for instance. However, static cultivations are shaded by high production costs.

In order to overcome this limitation and improve the productions yields, some reactors have

been developed. For instance, the horizontal lift reactor [15] and the rotator disk [16] (Figure 7)

allow a semi-continuous cultivation of BC. The first one give the same properties as statically

produced BC whereas the rotating one produce a BC capable to retain two times more water

than BC produced in static conditions. Another reactor called "aerosol bioreactor" [17] can be

used in order to produce BC in continuous conditions. The production is ensured by a spray of

glucose at the interface between the culture medium and the air. It leads to homogeneous

pellicles with enhanced mechanical properties. Creation of several sheets of BC instead of one

thick membrane is also possible by alternatively stop and start the flux of glucose.

Figure 7- Rotary disk reactor [15] (left); Horizontal lift reactor [4] (right).

Agitating culture reactors have also been developed, they allow BC production with higher

production rates, lower costs and different shapes such as elliptical (air lift modified reactor

[18]) and spherical (bubble column reactor [2]). For instance, the air lift modified reactors allow

producing BC with a three time higher rate and the pellets had an average diameter of 10 mm. It

has been considered that these agitating reactors could be the most suitable for large scale BC

production.[2]

Another way to improve the BC production is to choose an appropriate culture medium. The

most influent parameters of a BC culture medium are the carbon and nitrogen sources. BC is

Page 18: Louise SAIDI Nanocompósitos de celulose bacteriana/poli(N

Bacterial cellulose /poly (N-methacryloyl glycine) prepared by in situ polymerization for biomedical applications 12/56

mostly produced using the Hestrin-Schramm (HS) medium that uses glucose as carbon source

and a combination of peptone and yeast extract as nitrogen sources. [19]

However, it has been observed that it is possible to enhance BC production by modifying this

culture medium. Several types of carbon and nitrogen sources have been compared. Among the

tested carbon sources, one can find several sugars such as glucose, sucrose, maltose, xylose,

fructose, lactose, and polysaccharides as starch, but also other compounds such as ethanol and

glycerol. Glycerol and glucose were the most efficient sources.[20] In the same study, several

nitrogen sources such as peptone, yeast extract, tryptone, and polypeptone beef extract had also

been compared, in that case yeast extract was the source leading to the higher BC production.

2.1.2 Bacterial cellulose properties

First of all, bacterial cellulose has a high degree of polymerization (from 2000 to 8000) [21] and

a high crystallinity (generally between 60% and 90%).[21] BC is also well known and

appreciated for its high purity, because in contrary to plant cellulose, BC is free of

hemicelluloses, pectin and lignin. Furthermore, both plant cellulose and bacterial cellulose are

biocompatible and biodegradable.[2]

Secondly, bacterial cellulose is characterized by a particular nano fibrillar network structure

which confers to it high porosity and water retain capacity.[2] These properties are very useful

in wound dressing or burn curing for instance.[22], [23] Specifically, BC nanofibers are

approximately 3-15 nm thick and 70-80 nm width. Those nanofibers are composed of

protofibers of 2-4 nm diameter gathered to create a ribbon.[2] BC ribbons are arranged in a

particular 3D network (Figure 8) which is responsible for BC properties. [2], [24]

Figure 8 - SEM micrographs of bacterial cellulose surface [25] (left) and cross section [2] (right).

This peculiar nano fibrillar structure together with the high crystallinity provides also very good

mechanical properties, especially in tension mode. Indeed, the Young's modulus of BC has been

reported [2] to be equal to 15 GPa, which is very high compared to other typical polymers

widely used in commercial applications, such as polypropylene (PP) or poly(ethylene

Page 19: Louise SAIDI Nanocompósitos de celulose bacteriana/poli(N

Bacterial cellulose /poly (N-methacryloyl glycine) prepared by in situ polymerization for biomedical applications 13/56

terephthalate) (PET). Moreover, BC shows a tensile strength between 200-300 MPa, also

considerably high when compared to other polymers and in the same range as steel. These

tensile properties make BC very promising as reinforcing element to improve the mechanical

resistance of composite materials.

In summary, BC and plant cellulose fibers have the same chemical structure but different

morphologies and fiber dimensions (Figure 9), and therefore, completely distinct properties, as

summarized and compared in the Table 1.

Figure 9 - Electron micrographs of plant cellulose fibers (left) and bacterial cellulose (right).[26]

Table 1- Comparison of bacterial and plant cellulose fibers properties.

Degree of

polymerization Nanofibers dimensions Tensile strength Young's modulus

BC [2] 2000-8000

3-15 nm thickness

70-80 nm width

1-20 μm length

200-300 MPa 15 GPa

Plant cellulose 3000-15000 [21] 5-30 μm diameter [5]

1-25 mm length [5]

300-500MPa

[27] 3-36GPa [27]

Page 20: Louise SAIDI Nanocompósitos de celulose bacteriana/poli(N

Bacterial cellulose /poly (N-methacryloyl glycine) prepared by in situ polymerization for biomedical applications 14/56

2.2 Bacterial cellulose applications

BC peculiar properties have led to various applications in distinct fields, including for example

the food industry, cosmetics and biomedicine.

BC is appreciated for its peculiar viscosity and gelatinous aspects. Indeed, BC is the main

component of the Philippian’s dessert "Nata de Coco" [28] (Figure 10). BC has also been used

as a food additive in order to modify the texture of the food or to reduce its caloric content.[1],

[29]

In the cosmetic industry, BC is used as a component of several commercial products such as, for

instance, facial scrubs [30] and masks.[31]

Nevertheless, it is in the biomedical field that BC found most potentialities. For example, BC's

high mechanical strength coupled with its biocompatibility, in situ moldability and water

retention capacity inspired the production of artificial BC blood vessels [1], [32] (Figure 10).

The high mechanical strength allows those vessels to resist to the high blood pressure.

Additionally, BC has also been explored in the field of tissue engineering and in particular for

wound and burn treatment (Figure 10).[22] Indeed, its capacity to retain water is really

appreciated in order to repair the skin after a burn. BC is able to keep the moisture close to the

wound and also to protect it from the air, facilitating the skin regeneration.

Last but not least, BC has been investigated as a drug delivery system,[3], [33]–[40] in

particular for transdermal applications. It has been studied in drug delivery system mostly for its

porous structure, mechanical properties and its biocompatibility. For example, the use of BC

membranes for transdermal delivery of several drugs, as lidocaine, ibuprofen, caffeine and

diclofenac have been reported.

Figure 10 - a) Nata de coco; b) BC artificial blood vessel;[32] c) BC as wound healing

membranes.[16]

Page 21: Louise SAIDI Nanocompósitos de celulose bacteriana/poli(N

Bacterial cellulose /poly (N-methacryloyl glycine) prepared by in situ polymerization for biomedical applications 15/56

2.3 BC/polymer nanocomposites

The potentialities of BC can be extended by combining it with other materials including natural

or synthetic polymers or even inorganic nanophases (for example, BC/silver nanoparticles [23],

[41], [42], BC/hydroxyapatite [25], [43]–[46], BC/Fe3O4 [47], BC/Silica [48]). Regarding the

nanocomposites made with polymers, BC has for instance, been extensively used as reinforcing

element in nanocomposites for potential applications in numerous fields as electronics and

biomedicine areas.[3], [9], [49]–[51] There are at least four distinct ways to prepare BC based

nanocomposites: namely (a) blending BC with the polymeric matrix either by melting-mixing or

dispersion of BC into the polymer solution followed by drying [52], [53]; (b) modification of

the bacteria culture medium (addition of the polymer into the culture medium) [54]–[56]; (c)

incorporation of a polymer solution into BC membranes by diffusion followed by drying [57]–

[60] and, (d) in situ polymerization inside the BC network.[45], [61]–[65]

In this study, particular attention will be given to BC nanocomposites prepared by in situ

polymerization. However, some current researches made with each of the above mentioned

methodologies will be also presented in the next section.

2.3.1 BC nanocomposites prepared by blending

Preparing a BC nanocomposite by blending typically involves the previous disintegration and/or

modification of the BC membrane followed by mixing with the chosen polymeric matrix. The

blending step can be made either by melting mixing, or by dispersion of BC nanofibrils in a

polymer solution followed by solvent casting or other drying methodology, as supercritical CO2

drying.

Several types of nanocomposites prepared by blending were studied among which one can for

example find, BC/poly(L-lactic acid),[52] and BC/thermoplastic starch(TPS)[53];

For example, BC/thermoplastic starch [53] nanocomposites were made using shredded bacterial

cellulose. BC nanofibers were included into the TPS matrix during the gelatinization process of

the polymer. As a result, good adhesion between BC and TPS was observed, as well as a good

dispersion of the fibers into the matrix. Moreover, an enhancement of the thermal properties,

tensile strength and Young's modulus of the polymer were promoted by the addition of BC

(Figure 11). However, even if the moisture sorption was reduced by BC, the obtained

composites appeared to be humidity sensitive.

Page 22: Louise SAIDI Nanocompósitos de celulose bacteriana/poli(N

Bacterial cellulose /poly (N-methacryloyl glycine) prepared by in situ polymerization for biomedical applications 16/56

Figure 11 - Young modulus (a) and tensile strength (b) of corn starch thermoplastic composites

reinforced with 1% and 5% of bacterial and vegetable cellulose.[53]

Another example of BC nanocomposites made by blending are the BC/poly(L-lactic acid)

(PLA) that were produced by Yuan and co-workers.[52] These composites were made by

thermal-induced liquid-solid phase separation technology in order to reinforce PLA with BC

fibers. As a result, the obtained composite had better surface hydrophilicity and thermal

properties than PLA, and enhanced porosity and mechanical properties compared to that of the

homopolymer.

2.3.2 BC nanocomposites made by modifying the culture medium

The modification of the BC culture medium to produce novel nanocomposites is normally

achieved by the addition of either soluble or insoluble polymers to the culture medium before

the inoculation. Therefore, the polymer is incorporated into the BC network during the

biosynthesis. Normally, this modification of the culture medium doesn't require a special

processing after BC production; however, typical purification treatments need to be performed.

Culture modification has been used, for example, to synthesize BC nanocomposites with chitin

nanocrystals,[54], poly(ethylene oxide) (PEO),[55] and poly(vinyl alcohol) (PVA).[56]

For instance, BC/poly(ethylene oxide) nanocomposites were prepared by adding PEO in the

culture medium.[55] Different BC/PEO w/w ratios were tested (from 15:85 to 59:41) and it has

been observed that the higher the ratio the smaller the cellulose nanofibers were. The cellulose

nanofibers were attached in bundles of 75-770 nm wide and the size of the bundles increase

with the content of PEO. However, for all tested ratios, the BC nanofibers were homogeneously

dispersed in the PEO matrix. The crystallinity and melting temperature of the nanocomposites

were reduced when compared to that of PEO; for the ratio 59:41 the crystallinity went from

67% for pure PEO to 21% and the melting temperature of PEO decreased 10 degrees (Figure

12). Results have also shown that the ratio between Iα and Iβ decrease with an increase of the

BC:PEO ratio and that the preferred crystallization form of BC was Iβ. However, PEO thermal

stability and tensile properties were increased by the inclusion of BC.

Page 23: Louise SAIDI Nanocompósitos de celulose bacteriana/poli(N

Bacterial cellulose /poly (N-methacryloyl glycine) prepared by in situ polymerization for biomedical applications 17/56

Figure 12 - DSC thermograms illustrating the determination of the glass transition and melting

temperatures in the nanocomposite (left) and the variation in the melting endotherm of PEO as a

function of the BC/PEO w/w ratio (right).[55]

Another study reported the synthesis of BC/poly(vinyl alcohol) nanocomposites by addition of

PVA into the bacteria culture medium.[56] PVA was introduced to the HS medium under

stirring and then incubated at 28 °C. The obtained pellicles were then cross-linked with glyoxal.

These nanocomposites kept the transparency of PVA, even for the largest amount of BC.

However, the presence of the cross-linker induced a yellowish coloration to the films. BC

incorporation in the PVA matrix has led to an increase in the crystallinity of the matrix in the

nanocomposite; nevertheless, it did not impact its ductility. Finally, the reinforcement of PVA

with BC led to nanocomposites with excellent mechanical, thermal and dimensional properties,

as well as moisture stability. This enhancement of the nanocomposites properties is mainly due

to hydrogen bonding and chemical cross-linking between PVA and BC.

Page 24: Louise SAIDI Nanocompósitos de celulose bacteriana/poli(N

Bacterial cellulose /poly (N-methacryloyl glycine) prepared by in situ polymerization for biomedical applications 18/56

2.3.3 BC nanocomposites prepared by diffusion of a polymer solution into the BC membrane

This methodology consists in introducing a BC membrane into a specific polymer solution

allowing the polymer solution to migrate into the membrane by diffusion. Afterwards, the

sample is dried to obtain the nanocomposites.

This technique has already been used to synthesized BC/poly(ethylene glycol),[57] BC/poly(3-

hydroxybutyrate),[58] and BC/polycaprolactone (PCL) [60] and BC/poly(L-lactic acid) (PLA)

[59] nanocomposites, among many others.

For instance, BC/poly(L-lactic acid) (PLA) [59] nanocomposites were prepared by introducing

BC membranes into a PLA solution in chloroform. Optical analysis showed that the

characteristic transparency of PLA was kept even after the incorporation of BC (Figure 13). In

addition, BC/PLA nanocomposites showed higher crystallinity than pure PLA and improved

mechanical properties.

Figure 13 - Light transmittance of (a) bacterial cellulose pellicle, (b) PLLA/bacterial

cellulose nanocomposite film, and (c) PLLA film.[59]

2.3.4 BC nanocomposites prepared by in situ polymerization

The preparation of BC nanocomposites by in situ polymerization involves the introduction of a

monomer (and initiator and/or cross linker) into the BC membrane, and finally the

polymerization is subsequently triggered by setting-up appropriated conditions. Different types

of polymerization approaches can be used, such as conventional free radical polymerization,

atom transfer radical polymerization (ATRP), reversible addition-fragmentation chain transfer

(RAFT), among others. For instance, ATRP is a polymerization technique that allows the

covalent linkage between the polymer and the cellulose chains, while in conventional free

radical polymerization it could be necessary to use a bi-functional monomer to promote the

cross linkage of the polymer inside the BC network and consequently prevent its lixiviation

during processing or washing.

Page 25: Louise SAIDI Nanocompósitos de celulose bacteriana/poli(N

Bacterial cellulose /poly (N-methacryloyl glycine) prepared by in situ polymerization for biomedical applications 19/56

Several BC nanocomposites had already been prepared by in situ polymerization using different

monomers (aniline,[61] styrene,[45] 4-styrene sulfonic acid,[66] acrylate monomers[62]–[65])

and polymerization methodologies.

For example, conducting BC nanocomposites were prepared by conventional polymerization of

aniline, in the presence of dodecylbenzenylsulfonic acid (DBSA), into a BC membrane.[61]

First, a DBSA/aniline solution in ethanol and water was prepared and then, the BC membranes

were introduced in the solution; afterward the polymerization was carried out at 25 °C during 24

h. The obtained nanocomposites membranes were washed with ethanol. FTIR and XRD

analysis were performed and confirmed the polymerization of aniline inside the bacterial

cellulose network. Moreover, mechanical tests showed that the nanocomposites were more

brittle than BC alone. However, the results showed that the nanocomposites were conductive

which confirmed the potentialities of BC as scaffold to create conductive materials.

In another study, Peng et al. [45] prepared BC/polystyrene (PS) nanocomposites by adding a

BC membrane into a styrene solution with 1 wt% of azodiisobutyronitrile (AIBN) at room

temperature during 3 hours. SEM analysis showed that the porous structure of BC was modified

by the PS incorporation mainly because it filled the pores of the BC membranes. Additionally,

results showed that the nanocomposites were characterized by a lamellar structure (Figure 14)

of 300 nm maximum layer thickness and that the mechanical properties of PS were increased by

the creation of the nanocomposites. However, no signs of strong interaction between the two

compounds (PS and BC) were observed.

Figure 14 - SEM micrographs of the cross section of BC/PS nanocomposites.[45]

In situ polymerization has also been explored to prepare distinct acrylate polymers/BC

nanocomposites.[62]–[65], Acrylate polymers are widely used because they are very well

known by chemists and easy to prepare and to tune due to the high availability of different

acrylate monomers.

For example, BC/poly(2-hydroxyethyl methacrylate) (PHEMA) nanocomposites films were

prepared by conventional in situ polymerization using poly(ethylene glycol) diacrylate

Page 26: Louise SAIDI Nanocompósitos de celulose bacteriana/poli(N

Bacterial cellulose /poly (N-methacryloyl glycine) prepared by in situ polymerization for biomedical applications 20/56

(PEGDA) as cross-linker.[62] PHEMA appeared to fill the BC membranes in a quite

homogeneous way (Figure 15) and an increase of the translucence of the materials was

observed. It has been also shown that the cross-linking prevented the dissolution of the polymer

during the washing step and consequently, the polymer content in the nanocomposites increased

with the amount of PEGDA. It was also observed that the 3D structure of BC was not affected

by the polymerization. The thermal stability and mechanical properties of these nanocomposites

were enhanced when compared to those of PHEMA due to the excellent compatibility between

BC and the PHEMA. Finally, a good swelling ratio of 200-260% was obtained and

biocompatibility tests confirmed that these nanocomposite films were non-cytotoxic and

allowed the cellular proliferation.

Figure 15 – Visual aspects of BC/PHEMA/PEGDA (left) and SEM cross sections images (right)[62]

In addition, BC/poly(glycerol methacrylate) (PGMMA),[63] BC/poly(2-hydroxyethyl

methacrylate) (PHEMA),[63] BC/poly(2-ethoxyethyl methacrylate) (PEOEMA),[63], [64]

BC/poly(2-ethylhexyl acrylate) (PEHA),[64] BC/poly(n-vinyl pyrrolidone) (PNVP) [64]

hydrogels were prepared by Hobzova et al. [63] and Kramer et al. [64] All hydrogels were

prepared by UV radical polymerization in an aqueous medium after introducing the different

monomers into the BC membrane. However, for the case of EOEMA and EHA, which are

hydrophobic, a solvent exchange reaction from water to 2-propanol and ethanol was performed.

Cross-linkers were used in all cases, and results showed that an almost complete filling of the

BC membrane by the polymers was attained with the highest concentration of cross-linkers and

only partial fiber covering was obtained with lower concentrations. All nanocomposites were

characterized by a good dispersion of the polymers within the BC network and cross linkage

appeared to reduce swelling capacity of the composites when high concentrations of cross

linkers were used. Figure 16 shows the aspect of a swelled composite. Regarding the

mechanical properties, it was observed for all hydrogels an improvement of these properties

when compared to the neat polymers.

Page 27: Louise SAIDI Nanocompósitos de celulose bacteriana/poli(N

Bacterial cellulose /poly (N-methacryloyl glycine) prepared by in situ polymerization for biomedical applications 21/56

Figure 16 - Photograph of BC – poly(HEMA-co-EOEMA) composite in the swollen state.[63]

Finally, in a different study, BC/poly(methyl methacrylate) (PMMA) and BC/poly(n-butyl

acrylate) (PBA) nanocomposites were produced by ATRP.[65] Firstly, BC membranes were

functionalized by esterification with 2-bromoisobutyryl bromide (BiBBR) and then methyl

methacrylate or n-butyl acrylate were polymerized from the BC macro initiator (Figure 17).

Figure 17 - Diagram of the various stages of the polymerization reaction.[65]

The obtained composites had properties depending on the amount of polymer grafted into the

membranes. Specifically, high grafting led to thermal behaviour similar to the corresponding

homopolymer while composites with low polymer incorporation had a TGA profile closer to

that of BC itself. The grafting of the polymer conferred to the nanocomposites a hydrophobic

character (Figure 18), as well as a decrease of the mechanical properties compared to those of

BC.

Figure 18 - Contact angle of a water droplet over (a) pristine BC, (b) BC-g-PMMA, and (c) BC-g-

PBA.[65]

Page 28: Louise SAIDI Nanocompósitos de celulose bacteriana/poli(N

Bacterial cellulose /poly (N-methacryloyl glycine) prepared by in situ polymerization for biomedical applications 22/56

3. Materials and methods

3.1 Chemicals

All chemicals were used as received. 2,2′-Azobis(2-methylpropionamidine) dihydrochloride

97% (AAPH), used as radical initiator, and N,N'-methylenebisacrylamide 99% (MBA), used as

cross-linker, were purchased from Sigma-Aldrich. N-methacryloyl glycine 95% (MGly) was

acquired from Synchem UG & Co. KG (Germany). For the MTT test, the HaCaT cell line was

obtained from Cell Lines Services (Eppelheim, Germany). The phosphate buffer solution (PBS)

(pH:7.2) and the Dulbecco′s Modified Eagle′s Medium (DMEM), as well as the fetal bovine

serum (FBS), L-glutamine, penicillin/streptomycin and fungizone were purchased from Gibco,

(Life Technologies, (Carlsbad, CA, USA), dimethylsulfoxide (DMSO) (reagent plus ≥ 95%)

and thiozolyl blue tetrazolium bromide (MTT) were supplied by Sigma-Aldrich. All other

reagents and solvents were of analytical grade and used as received.

3.2 BC membranes

Bacterial nanocellulose (BC) (three-dimensional network of nano- and micro-fibrils with 10–

200 nm width) in the form of wet membranes was produced in our laboratory using the

Gluconacetobacter sacchari bacterial strain [67] and following established culture procedures.

[19] In detail, the pre-inocula were prepared by growing the bacteria at 30 °C, during 48 h, in

static conditions, in HS liquid medium. After this period, the flask was vigorously agitated and

5 mL of the culture media was withdrawn and inoculated into a 45 mL liquid production

medium in 250 mL Erlenmeyer flasks. BC membranes were then treated three times with a 0.5

M NaOH solution, at 80 ºC, for 30 min and washed with distilled water until its whitening and

reaching pH 7.0. [68]

3.3 BC_PMGly nanocomposites

Wet BC 4x4 cm² membranes were weighted and 60% of their water content was removed by

hand pressing. They were then placed in balloons purged with nitrogen (N2) at 0 ºC during 1

hour with an aqueous solution of N-methacryloyl glycine, 2,2′-azobis(2-methylpropionamidine)

dihydrochloride (radical initiator) and N,N'-methylenebisacrylamide (cross-linker). Finally, the

balloons were left at 70 ºC during 6 hours. The membranes were then washed several times with

distilled water and leftward in water during one night. Afterwards, they were dried in the oven

at 40°C during 12 hours. The list of the different samples prepared, as well as their

compositions is presented in Table 2.

Page 29: Louise SAIDI Nanocompósitos de celulose bacteriana/poli(N

Bacterial cellulose /poly (N-methacryloyl glycine) prepared by in situ polymerization for biomedical applications 23/56

Table 2: List of the prepared membranes with their compositions

Sample WMGly/WBC WMBA/WMGly WAAPH/WMGly

BC - - -

BC_PMGly (1:1) 1 5% 1%

BC_PMGly (1:2) 2 5% 1%

BC_PMGly (1:3) 3 5% 1%

BC_PMGly (1:5) 5 5% 1%

3.4 Drug delivery assays

Impregnation of diclofenac (DCF) into a BC_PMGly membrane

Two different membranes of BC_PMGly 1:3 (one with 5% of cross-linker and the other with

10%) were prepared following the procedure explained in the section 3.2 and kept in wet state;

in the meantime, a diclofenac solution was prepared by dissolving 80 mg of DCF in 5 mL of

water.

After being drained (40%) the membranes were immersed into the diclofenac solution until

complete absorption of the solution and dried in the oven at 40 °C following the method used by

Silva et al.[37], and Trovatti et al.[35] and then the release of drug was studied. Table 3

summarizes the different membranes that were prepared and their compositions.

Table 3: Nanocomposites’ designation and compositions prepared for drug release

Sample WMGly/WBC WMBA/WMGly WAAPH/WMGly Diclofenac (mg/mL)

BC _PMGly (1:3:5)_DCF 3 5% 1% 20

BC_PMGly (1:3:10)_DCF 3 10% 1% 20

Drug release test

The release of the drug was tested at two different pH values, namely pH 7.4 and 2.1, in order to

compare the influence of the pH media on the release profile.

Drug release tests at pH 7.4 were performed with a 0.01 M phosphor buffer solution (pH 7.4).

This solution was prepared by dissolving 8.0 g of NaCl, 0.2 g of KCl, 0.24 g of KH2PO4 and

3.63 g Na2HPO4.10H2O in 1 L of distilled water. The BC membrane was then placed in 500 mL

of this solution previously heated at 37 °C. 5 mL aliquots of the solution were removed every

hour and the absorbance at 276 nm was assessed in order to control the release of the drug.

Page 30: Louise SAIDI Nanocompósitos de celulose bacteriana/poli(N

Bacterial cellulose /poly (N-methacryloyl glycine) prepared by in situ polymerization for biomedical applications 24/56

Drug release tests at pH 2.1 were performed by immersing the impregnated nanocomposites

into an aqueous solution of HCl (pH 2.1) at 37 °C during 24 hours. Again, the release of the

drug was controlled by measuring the absorbance of the solution every hour.

3.5 Biomineralization of the nanocomposites

The biomimetic growth of hydroxyapatite was initiated from simulated body fluid solution and

adapted from literature data. [25], [44], [46], [69], [70]

To prepare the SBF solution, 6.5456 g of NaCl were dissolved into 960 mL of water, then

2.2682 g of NaHCO3, 0.373 g of KCl and 0.1419 g of Na2PO4 were added to the solution, that

was then heated to 37°C before adding 0.3049 g of MgCl2 x 6H2O, 9 mL of 1M HCl, 0.3675 g

of CaCl2 x 2H2, 0.071 g of Na2SO4 and 6.057 g of (CH2OH)3CNH2. The pH of the solution was

then adjusted to 7.4 with 40mL of 1M HCl. The volume of the solution was then fixed to 1000

mL with distilled water. The solution was kept in the refrigerator. Magnetic stirring was

maintained during the entire preparation.

24 hours later, the nanocomposites were immersed into the SBF solution at 37 °C for 7 days.

The supersaturation conditions were maintained by refreshing the solution every 24hours. The

resulted nanocomposites were then rinsed with water and dried (half of the sample: freeze dried

(FD), the other half: oven dried (OD)) before being characterised by SEM and XRD.

3.6 Nanocomposites characterization

All the obtained nanocomposites membranes were characterized in terms of structure (FTIR),

crystallinity (XRD), morphology (SEM), thermal stability (TGA), mechanical properties

(tensile tests, DMA), swelling behaviour and biological properties (MTT test).

3.6.1 Fourier Transform Infrared spectroscopy (FTIR)

FTIR-ATR spectra were taken with a Perkin-Elmer FT-IR System Spectrum BX

spectrophotometer equipped with a single horizontal Golden Gate ATR cell over the range 600–

4000 cm−1 at a resolution of 2 cm−1

averaged on 32 scans.

3.6.2 X-Ray Diffraction (XRD)

XRD analysis were carried out on a PANalytica Empyrean diffractometer using Cu Kα radiation

(λ=1.541Ǻ). Analysis were made in reflection mode from 5° to 50° (2ϴ) with a step of 0.026°

and an absolute step rate of 197s.

Page 31: Louise SAIDI Nanocompósitos de celulose bacteriana/poli(N

Bacterial cellulose /poly (N-methacryloyl glycine) prepared by in situ polymerization for biomedical applications 25/56

3.6.3 Scanning Electron Microscopy (SEM)

SEM micrographs of the membranes surface and cross-section were taken with a HR-FESEM

SU-70 Hitachi equipment operating at 4kV. All samples were coated with evaporated carbon.

Surface micrographs were obtained with magnification of x10000 and x30000 and cross-section

micrographs with magnification of x3500 and x15000.

3.6.4 Thermogravimetric Analysis (TGA)

TGA assays were carried out with a SETSYS Setaram TGA analyser equipped with a platinum

cell. The samples were heated from 20 ºC to 800 ºC with a constant rate of 10 ºC min-1 under a

nitrogen flow of 10 mL min-1.

3.6.5 Dynamical Mechanical Analysis (DMA)

DMA was performed with a Tritec 2000 DMA (Triton Technologies) operating in tension

modes (single strain) at 1 Hz and 0.005 mm displacement. Samples (30 x 5 mm²) were heated

from -100 ºC to 170 ºC with a constant heating rate of 2 ºC min-1.

3.6.6 Mechanical tests

50 x 10 mm² specimens were tested in tension with an Instron 5564 equipment. After being

dried in the oven, the specimens were put in a desiccator during 48h to assure a homogeneous

humidity and then tested at room temperature with a rate of 10 mm min-1 using a 1 kN load cell.

2 membranes were tested for each nanocomposite composition and 3 replicates were analysed

for each membrane. Elongation at break (%), tensile strength (MPA), and Young’s modulus

(MPA) were computed with the Bluehill 3 software.

3.6.7 Swelling ratio (SR)

The swelling ratios (SR) of the membranes were determined by measuring the weight difference

between wet and dry states of the membranes using the following equation:

SR (%) = (Ws – Wd)/Wd x 100; where Ws is the weight of the specimen in the swollen state and

Wd its initial weight in the dry state. For the measurements, 10x10 mm² specimens were dried,

and then immersed in distilled water. Weight increase was then regularly registered during 48

hours.

Page 32: Louise SAIDI Nanocompósitos de celulose bacteriana/poli(N

Bacterial cellulose /poly (N-methacryloyl glycine) prepared by in situ polymerization for biomedical applications 26/56

3.6.8 MTT test

MTT (3-(4, 5-dimethylthiazolyl-2)-2, 5-diphenyltetrazolium bromide) test was performed on

BC, BC_PMGly 1:1 and BC_PMGly 1:3 in order to assess the cytotoxicity of the membranes.

The membranes with a BC:monomer ratio of 1:1 and 1:3 were chosen as they are the two

extreme conditions we have.

A MTT test is a colorimetric assay that is used to determine the viability of the cell metabolic

activity. In our case, in order to be closer to the one of the aimed applications (transdermal

delivery), we have chosen to work with HaCaT skin cells which is a non-tumorigenic

immortalized human keratinocyte cell line. [71] For the test, the cells were grown in complete

Dulbecco’s modified Eagle’s medium supplemented with 10% fetal bovine serum, 2 mM L-

glutamine, 10000 U/mL penicillin/streptomycin and 250 µg/mL fungizone at 37 °C in 5% CO2

humidified atmosphere. Cells were daily observed under an inverted phase-contrast Eclipse

TS100 microscope (Nikon, Tokyo, Japan). The tests were performed on the two extreme

nanocomposites: BC_PMGly 1:1 and BC_PMGly 1:3, and to have more accurate results, 3

samples per nanocomposites were tested.

Biocompatibility assessment was divided into 3 main steps:

- Preparation of the extract: step during which the membranes are immersed into the chosen

media to induce the dissolution of every product /compound that could be toxic into the media;

- Exposure/incubation of the cells: the previous extract is added to the cells, the plates are then

put in the incubator from 24h to 72h depending on the test conditions.

- Addition of the MTT reagent and the reading of the plates: the MTT reagent is absorbed by the

cells, and the ones that are still alive transform the MTT into its insoluble purple formazan

derivative. By assessing the difference of absorbance between the “control” wells and the wells

with cells and extract, we are then able to estimate to quantity of cells still alive at the end of the

test and therefore characterize the cytotoxicity of the samples.

Protocol of the test:

Samples of 6 cm² area were prepared, rinsed with ultra-pure water and then sterilized in ethanol

70% during one hour. After that time, they were rinsed again with sterilized PBS to remove the

ethanol, dissolved in 1.5 mL of medium and incubated at 37 ºC, with 5% CO2 for 24 hours to

prepare the extract. Due to the powder state of the polymer, its extract was prepared by

dissolving 100 mg of polymer into 4.5 mL of medium and sterilized by filtration with a

nanocellulose filter.

In the meantime, three 96 wells plates were prepared with 5x4 wells filled up with 60000

cells/well, 50000 cells/well and 30000 cells/well corresponding to a future incubation time of 24

Page 33: Louise SAIDI Nanocompósitos de celulose bacteriana/poli(N

Bacterial cellulose /poly (N-methacryloyl glycine) prepared by in situ polymerization for biomedical applications 27/56

h, 48 h, and 72 h. The cells were then incubated during 24 h for adhesion. After that time, the

extracts obtained from the incubated membranes were removed and 100 μL of it were added to

each well. The plates were then incubated for 24 h, 48 h, and 72 h.

At the end of the incubation time, 50 μL of MTT (at a concentration of 1 g L-1) were added in

each well and incubated for 4 h at 37 ºC in 5% CO2 humidified atmosphere. After that, culture

medium was removed and 150 μL of dimethyl sulfoxide (DMSO) were added into the wells and

the plate was placed in a shaker for 2 hours with gentle mixing. Three more wells were filled up

with DMSO to perform the blank absorbance measurement. The plates were finally read with a

BioTek Synergy HT plate reader. The absorbance of the wells was measured at 570, 551 and

842 nm and analysed with Gen5.1 software. Data were analyzed by a two way ANOVA,

followed by a Holm-Sidak test to evaluate the significant differences between the different

membranes.

Page 34: Louise SAIDI Nanocompósitos de celulose bacteriana/poli(N

Bacterial cellulose /poly (N-methacryloyl glycine) prepared by in situ polymerization for biomedical applications 28/56

4. Results and Discussion

Different BC nanocomposites membranes were prepared by varying the amount of monomer

impregnated into the BC membranes in order to determine the influence of the polymer content

onto the nanocomposites properties. Furthermore, because of the different analyses

requirements, membranes were also prepared with different sizes and shapes, either 4x4 cm²

square or 7 cm diameter disc. However, due to the impossibility to perform a film from the

poly(N-methacryloyl glycine), several analysis such as the tensile test and DMA were not

performed on the polymer alone.

The schematic representation of the reaction involved during the free radical polymerization is

displayed in Figure 19 and the visual aspect of the obtained nanocomposites membranes, in the

dry and wet states, and of BC is shown in Figure 20.

One can see that BC, in the dry state, has the appearance of a white film, contrary to the dried

nanocomposites that appeared as yellowish films. This first change of visual aspect allowed us

to confirm the polymerization of the N-methacryloyl glycine into the membranes. Additionally,

the membranes with a BC/monomer ratio of 1:1, 1:2 and 1:3 were quite flexible. However, due

to a too high amount of polymer and cross linker, the one 1:5 membrane was very brittle and

therefore, the detailed characterization analyses were not performed for this membrane. On the

other hand, the wet membranes have the aspect of white swollen gels with good malleability.

By analysing the visual aspect of the membrane, homogeneity differences could also been

perceived; indeed, square membranes seemed to be more homogeneous than the disc ones. This

difference might be due to a better repartition of the monomer into the membranes and a more

perfect distribution of both membranes’ surfaces in the case of a smaller sample thanks to a

better fitting into the reaction balloon. Moreover, due to the drying step, some irregularities

were also observed on the membranes surfaces. In order to improve the homogeneity of the

membranes, the circular nanocomposites were then prepared in an Erlenmeyer instead of a

balloon, to induce a better symmetry of the membranes’ surfaces into the reaction medium.

Finally, the amount of polymer impregnated into the membranes, as well as the yield

(conversion rate) of the polymerization reaction were determined by assessing the weight

difference before and after the in situ free radical polymerization and are summarized in Table

4. The thickness of the membranes, in dry state, were also measured and correlated with the

amount of acrylate polymer introduced into the membranes. The higher the amount of acrylate

polymer introduced, the thicker the membranes, nevertheless, one has to keep in mind that this

thickness, is also influenced by the initial thickness of the BC membrane.

Page 35: Louise SAIDI Nanocompósitos de celulose bacteriana/poli(N

Bacterial cellulose /poly (N-methacryloyl glycine) prepared by in situ polymerization for biomedical applications 29/56

Figure 19 - Schematic representation of the MGly free radical polymerization reaction using MBA

as a cross-linker and AAPH as thermal initiator.

Figure 20 - Visual aspects of a) dry BC, b) dry and c) wet nanocomposite (BC_PMGly 1:3).

Table 4: Effective Polymer/BC ratio, polymerization yield, and thickness of the different

nanocomposites. The thickness was average from 4 different samples per membranes.

BC mass,

dry state

(mg)

MGly

mass

(mg)

Nanocomposites

mass (mg)

BC/PMGly

ratio

PMGly/MGly

(%)

Thickness

(mm)

BC_PMGly 1:1 282.17 282.2 352.71 4.0 25% 0.113

BC_PMGly 1:2 387.00 774.00 511.00 3.1 16% 0.145

BC_PMGly 1:3 390.64 1117.3 619.40 1.7 19% 0.170

Page 36: Louise SAIDI Nanocompósitos de celulose bacteriana/poli(N

Bacterial cellulose /poly (N-methacryloyl glycine) prepared by in situ polymerization for biomedical applications 30/56

4.1 Fourier Transform Infrared spectroscopy (FTIR)

FTIR analysis was performed in order to confirm the success of the MGly polymerization into

the BC membranes. Figure 21 displays the FTIR-ATR spectra of pure BC, PMGly and the

different BC_PMGly nanocomposites prepared in this study.

On the one hand, the main bands observed in the FTIR spectrum of pure BC are a broad band

around 3340 cm-1 corresponding to the O-H vibrations; two small bands around 2893 cm-1

attributed to the stretching vibrations of the CH2 and CH groups; two peaks around 1330 cm-1

and 1105 cm-1, respectively matching the C-H and C-O vibrations of the C-OH groups; and a

sharp band around 980-1050 cm-1 assigned to the stretching vibration of C-O-C of the acetal

linkages of cellulose [66], [72], [73]

On the other hand, the FTIR spectrum of PMGly is characterized by one band at 3342 cm-1

assigned to the amine N-H stretching; another one at 2930 cm-1 due to the O-H vibrations, two

peaks corresponding to the stretching of the C=O moieties at 1715 cm-1 (methacryloyl) and

1621 cm-1 (glycine), and one peak at 1190 cm-1 corresponding to the vibrations of the C-O

coming from the C-OH groups of the glycine moieties.

In addition, while looking at the nanocomposites spectra, one can first observe that they clearly

correspond to the sum of BC’s and PMGly’s spectra, which corroborate the success of the

polymerization. Hence, the polymerization was confirmed by the appearance of the specific

vibrations of PMGly such as: the two bands matching the C=O vibrations at 1715 cm-1 (C=O

methacryloyl) and 1623 cm-1 (C=O glycine); the band at 1519 cm-1 attributed to the NH

deformation; and the one at 1191 cm-1 due to the vibrations of the C-O acrylate ester. The NH

characteristic vibration at 3340 cm-1 can also be observed on the nanocomposites spectra,

however, one can notice that it appears with a decreased intensity compared to the one on the

polymer spectrum due to overlap with the OH vibration of bacterial cellulose. The bands at

2894 cm-1 (C-H stretching), 1300-1400 cm-1 (C-OH) and 1160-1190 cm-1 (C-O stretching) are

typical of both BC and PMGly. Finally, the results show that the intensity of the characteristic

peaks of the polymer are increasing with the amount of polymer into the nanocomposite.

Page 37: Louise SAIDI Nanocompósitos de celulose bacteriana/poli(N

Bacterial cellulose /poly (N-methacryloyl glycine) prepared by in situ polymerization for biomedical applications 31/56

Figure 21 - FTIR-ATR spectra of native BC, PMGly and BC_PMGly nanocomposites with

different compositions.

4.2 X-Ray Diffraction (XRD)

X-ray diffraction analyses were performed on BC and BC nanocomposites to evaluate the effect

of the polymerization on the crystallinity of the different membranes. The obtained

diffractograms are shown in the Figure 22.

The diffraction pattern of BC, displays the typical reflections of Cellulose I with peaks at 2θ

equal to 14.8° (101), 16.8° (101), 22.9° (002) and 36.3° (040). [21], [65], [72]

Conversely, poly(N-methacryloyl glycine) is an amorphous polymer. Indeed, no significant

crystalline orientation reflections are observed on its diffractogram. It is characterized by a

broad band centered on 18° typical of amorphous polymers.

Regarding the different nanocomposites, one can noticed that they all displayed the same

crystalline pattern, with three main reflections coming from BC semi-crystalline structure at 2θ

equal to 14.4°, 16.8° and 22.7°; furthermore, the spectra showed a decrease crystallinity

compared to BC due to introduction of the amorphous polymer into BC’s network.

Page 38: Louise SAIDI Nanocompósitos de celulose bacteriana/poli(N

Bacterial cellulose /poly (N-methacryloyl glycine) prepared by in situ polymerization for biomedical applications 32/56

Figure 22 - Diffractograms of pure BC, PMGly, and BC_PMGly nanocomposites.

4.3 Scanning Electron Microscopy (SEM)

A selection of SEM micrographs of the surface and cross-section of the different

nanocomposites membranes and pure BC are shown in Figure 23. Those SEM analyses were

used to additionally confirm the polymerization reaction, to determine the morphology of the

nanocomposites and compare the difference in the structure induced by the amount of polymer

introduced into each membrane.

The micrographs of pure BC showed the typical 3D network structure of BC revealing

randomly organised nanofibers (surface images) and a lamellar structure (cross-section

micrographs). [24], [66], [72]

The micrographs of the different nanocomposite membranes allowed to observe not only the

inclusion of the acrylate polymer into the BC 3D network but also the polymer formation on

Page 39: Louise SAIDI Nanocompósitos de celulose bacteriana/poli(N

Bacterial cellulose /poly (N-methacryloyl glycine) prepared by in situ polymerization for biomedical applications 33/56

BC’s surface and, therefore, allowed to confirm the success of the polymerization. Moreover, all

the nanocomposite membranes clearly showed the typical nano- and microstructure of BC,

which permits to affirm that this was not affected by the polymerization reaction (Figure 23).

Finally, by the comparison of the different nanocomposites micrographs one can observe that,

as expected, the lower the ratio BC/monomer, the higher the amount of polymer included into

the BC membranes. Indeed, this is illustrated on the cross-section micrographs, by more filled

up lamellar spaces in the case of a ratio 1:3 than 1:1 and on surface micrographs, by an higher

covering of the 3D network (membranes 1:3) and a more distinct network in the case of the 1:1

membranes (Figure 23).

Figure 23 - SEM surface and cross-section micrographs of BC (left), BC_PMGly (1:1) (middle) and

BC_PMGly (1:3) (right). Surface images are on the first two rows with magnifications of x10k and

x30k and cross-section images are on the last two rows with magnifications of x3.50k and x15k.

4.4 Thermogravimetric Analysis (TGA)

Thermogravimetric analysis was used to check the thermal behavior of the nanocomposite

membranes and of the corresponding individual components.

Page 40: Louise SAIDI Nanocompósitos de celulose bacteriana/poli(N

Bacterial cellulose /poly (N-methacryloyl glycine) prepared by in situ polymerization for biomedical applications 34/56

The pure BC membrane displayed a thermogram with a single weight loss profile, typical of

cellulosic substrates, with an initial decomposition temperature around 270 ºC and a maximum

decomposition temperature at 348 ºC, corresponding to a weight loss of 47%.

In comparison, the poly(N-methacryloyl glycine) showed a double step weight loss profile and

is less thermally stable than BC. Its first decomposition initiated around 170 ºC and reached its

maximum at 242 ºC (weight loss 15 %) and the main decomposition started around 325 ºC with

a maximum at 404 ºC and corresponded to a weight loss of 60%.

All the nanocomposites showed a three step weight loss profile displaying decompositions due

to both BC and the acrylate polymer. All membranes started to degrade at around 190 ºC and

reached their first maximum decomposition between 232-242 ºC. The second degradation step

of the membranes corresponded to the decomposition of BC and began at 253 ºC and 264 ºC

indicating a diminution of the stability compared to BC. The last observed decomposition step

was due to the polymer enriched fraction degradation and started around 365 ºC for all the

membranes.

Additionally, one can notice an increase of the weight loss associated to the polymer

degradation with the increasing amount of polymer introduced into the membranes.

In sum, with a thermal degradation starting at around 190 ºC instead of 170 ºC for the

homopolymer the membranes can be considered more thermally stable than the PMGly itself.

This increase in thermal stability can be ascribed to the good compatibility between BC and the

polymer and the interactions established between them.

Page 41: Louise SAIDI Nanocompósitos de celulose bacteriana/poli(N

Bacterial cellulose /poly (N-methacryloyl glycine) prepared by in situ polymerization for biomedical applications 35/56

Figure 24 - Thermograms and the corresponding derivatives of BC, PMGly, and BC_PMGly

nanocomposites.

4.5 Dynamic Mechanical Analysis (DMA)

DMA was performed to investigate the mechanical and viscoelastic properties of the

nanocomposite membranes. Figure 25 displays the storage modulus (E’) and the tangent δ (tan

δ) of pure BC and of the different nanocomposites.

First, as one can perceive that pure BC displayed a storage modulus around 5.1 GPa almost in

all temperature range, whereas the different membranes seem to have lower storage modulus

between 1 and 1.5 GPa for the 1:1 and 1:2 membranes, and between 1.5 and 2.5 GPa for the 1:3

membrane. This reduction in storage capacity compared to pure BC is due to the addition of an

amorphous polymer into BC’s network. In addition, the membranes appeared to have higher

storage capacity in the lower range of temperature (-50 ºC 70 ºC).

Secondly, thanks to the analysis of the evolution of the tan δ in function of the temperature, one

can notice the absence of glass transition, therefore highlighting the crystallinity of the

Page 42: Louise SAIDI Nanocompósitos de celulose bacteriana/poli(N

Bacterial cellulose /poly (N-methacryloyl glycine) prepared by in situ polymerization for biomedical applications 36/56

nanocomposites, already observed in X-Ray analysis. Indeed, as pure BC, all the three

nanocomposites display a tan δ varying linearly with the temperature and without any evident

maximum.

Figure 25 - Storage modulus and tan δ in function of the temperature of BC and BC

nanocomposites obtained by DMA analysis in tension mode. The tan δ curves were smoothed with

Origin.

4.6 Tensile tests

Tensile tests were performed for the different obtained nanocomposites and on pure BC to

characterise the mechanical properties of the membranes and to determine the influence of the

nanocomposites’ composition on their mechanical properties. Figure 26 summarizes the

differences in Young’s modulus, tensile strength and elongation at break between all samples

(BC and BC/PMGly nanocomposites).

All the studied nanocomposites membranes showed reduced mechanical properties when

compared to pure BC as revealed by their lower Young’s modulus and tensile stress values.

This is obviously due to the introduction of an amorphous polymer into the 3D network of BC

as previously observed for the DMA results.

Page 43: Louise SAIDI Nanocompósitos de celulose bacteriana/poli(N

Bacterial cellulose /poly (N-methacryloyl glycine) prepared by in situ polymerization for biomedical applications 37/56

Additionally, by comparing the results from the different nanocomposites, one can notice that

regarding the Young’s modulus, the lower the amount of polymer the stiffer is the membrane.

With a Young’s modulus of 4.93 GPa, and a tensile strength of 19.92 MPa the BC_PMGly 1:1

membrane is the stiffer membrane. In comparison, the BC_PMGly 1:2 and 1:3 have a Young’s

modulus and a tensile strength of respectively 4.45 GPa and 3.55 GPa, and 10.78 and 11.98

GPa. Regarding, the elongation at break, one can notice that no significant difference can be

observed, however, the BC_PMGly 1:1 nanocomposites presented the higher deformation

before break.

Figure 26 - Tensile stress, Young’s modulus and elongation at break comparison in function of the

sample. a) Comparison between BC and the nanocomposites, b) Comparison only between the

nanocomposites.

4.7 Swelling ratio

The swelling behavior of the nanocomposite membranes was analyzed by measuring their water

uptake after drying. Figure 27 shows the evolution of the obtained swelling ratios in function of

time, and Figure 28 displays the FTIR spectrum of one nanocomposite before and after the

swelling test.

Several oscillations are clearly perceptible in the swelling graphs. This behavior was attributed

to the dissolution of the non-reticulated polymer, as in fact confirmed by FTIR (Figure 28). It is

perceptible a clear decrease of the intensity of the peaks corresponding to the acrylate polymer

(between 1720 and 1530 cm-1) compared to the intensity of the peaks of BC (around 1000 cm-1).

Page 44: Louise SAIDI Nanocompósitos de celulose bacteriana/poli(N

Bacterial cellulose /poly (N-methacryloyl glycine) prepared by in situ polymerization for biomedical applications 38/56

In conclusion, the polymer in the nanocomposites is not cross-linked enough to be retained into

the membrane in case of a too long immersion into water. Therefore, in this situation it is

difficult to evaluate this parameter and compare the different samples.

Figure 27 - Swelling ratios of BC, and BC_PMGly nanocomposites; Logarithmic fitting was applied

with Excel.

Figure 28 - FTIR spectra of the BC_PMGly 1:3 nanocomposite before and after the swelling tests.

Page 45: Louise SAIDI Nanocompósitos de celulose bacteriana/poli(N

Bacterial cellulose /poly (N-methacryloyl glycine) prepared by in situ polymerization for biomedical applications 39/56

4.8 MTT test

MTT test was performed to assess the cytotoxicity of the nanocomposites. Figure 29 shows the

preparation of the extract from the nanocomposites membranes. One can notice that the extract

from BC_PMGly 1:3 appears to have a more reddish color than BC and BC_PMGly 1:1. This

reddish color is synonym of a more acid medium (the Dulbecco′s Modified Eagle′s Medium,

DMEM, is usually pink when neutral). In our case, the acidic medium is due to a large amount

of polymer (with carboxylic acid moieties).

Figure 29 - Preparation of the extract, 6 cm² membranes dissolved in DMEM media.

After being incubated for 24 hours, as explained in the experimental section, the three extracts

coming from each membrane were grouped in conical tubes (Figure 30). Moreover, due to the

strong concentration of polymer the filtration of the extract was not successful and this one was

used as obtained after the dissolution of the polymer into the medium. As seen on Figure 30, the

acidic character of the polymer is characterized by a clear yellow solution.

Figure 30 - Visual aspects of the a) PMGly extract, and b) (from left to right) BC, BC-PMGly 1:1,

BC_PMGly 1:3 extracts.

Figure 31 shows the 96 wells plate filled with the cells and the extract before the incubation and

the Table 5 displays the schematic representation of each well.

Page 46: Louise SAIDI Nanocompósitos de celulose bacteriana/poli(N

Bacterial cellulose /poly (N-methacryloyl glycine) prepared by in situ polymerization for biomedical applications 40/56

Table 5 : Schematic representation of the plate

M M M M M M M M

M M +

cells

cells + BC

extract

cells + 1:1

extract

cells + 1:3

extract

cells + polymer

extract M M

M M +

cells cells + BC

cells + 1:1

extract

cells + 1:3

extract

cells + polymer

extract M M

M M +

cells cells + BC

cells + 1:1

extract

cells + 1:3

extract

cells + polymer

extract M M

M M +

cells cells + BC

cells + 1:1

extract

cells + 1:3

extract

cells + polymer

extract M M

M M M M M M M M

With M: media.

The wells with only the media were filled up in order to prevent the evaporation of the media in

the wells containing the cells and extracts.

Figure 31 - 96 wells plate with the cell and the extract before incubation.

The Figure 32 shows the plate after the incubation during 4 hours with MTT. One can notice a

purplish color due to the absorption of the MTT by the cell, and its transformation into purple

formazan by the one that are still alive.

Figure 32 - 96 wells plate after 24 hours incubation and 4 hours incubation with MTT

The cell viability of every specimen was assessed by measuring the absorbance of the solution

in each well and comparing it with the absorbance of the control one. Figure 33 shows the

obtained results for the different membranes on the skin viability.

Page 47: Louise SAIDI Nanocompósitos de celulose bacteriana/poli(N

Bacterial cellulose /poly (N-methacryloyl glycine) prepared by in situ polymerization for biomedical applications 41/56

Figure 33 – Effects of BC, BC_PMGly 1:1, 1:3 and PMGly on the HaCaT cells for exposure time of

24h, 48h and 72h. The results are presented as mean +/- standard deviation from 4 different

specimens per membrane. Symbol * represents significant difference between time of exposure for

the same membrane (p<0.05). Different letters represent significant differences between one

membrane and the control, or one membrane and another membrane for each exposure time

(p<0.05).

First of all, the results showed that the polymer induced almost 100% cell mortality. This is

certainly due to the high concentration of polymer directly dissolved in the media during the

preparation of the extract and also due to the impossibility of sterilize this extract; and therefore

have poor significance.

Nevertheless, using the two way ANOVA, followed by the Holm-Sidak test, it appears that the

3 membranes (BC, BC_PMGly 1:1, BC_PMGly 1:3) were not significantly different from the

control for an exposure time of 24 hours. One can therefore state, that those membranes are non-

cytotoxic to HaCaT after 24 hours of exposition. Additionally, the statistical analysis made on

the results from 48 hours of exposition revealed that BC, and BC_PMGly 1:3 have cell viability

of respectively 76% and 72%, whereas the BC_PMGly 1:1 is again considered as non-cytotoxic.

Moreover, after 72 hours of exposition, BC, BC_PMGly 1:1 and BC_PMGly 1:3 had cell

viability of respectively 82%, 79% and 68%.

Finally, the two-way ANOVA test also allowed us to say that the exposure time had no effect

on the cell viability of BC, but that it had influence on that of the two nanocomposites since for

both of them, the 72 hours test were significantly different from the 24 hours and the 48 hours.

Page 48: Louise SAIDI Nanocompósitos de celulose bacteriana/poli(N

Bacterial cellulose /poly (N-methacryloyl glycine) prepared by in situ polymerization for biomedical applications 42/56

4.9 Drug delivery essays

Pure BC membranes had been investigated as transdermal drug delivery systems with several

drug as for example diclofenac and lidocaine. [3], [33], [37], [39] However, for oral delivery it

is important to tailor the drug release as a function of pH, for example to avoid drug degradation

at lower pHs. In this line, we decided to test our nanocomposites as drug (diclofenac) delivery

systems in both acidic and neutral conditions because of their pH sensitivity.

Diclofenac, 2-(2-(2,6-dichlorophenylamino)phenyl)acetic acid (DCF), which chemical structure

is shown in the Figure 34, is a non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug. It is mainly used to relief

moderate suffering such as headache, osteoarthritis, rheumatoid arthritis or short term clinical

operations, by reducing the substances that causes pain and inflammation. [37], [74]

Figure 34 - Diclofenac chemical structure.

We have chosen to work on diclofenac in order to be able to compare its release from our new

nanocomposites and its release from pure BC membrane. [37]

Impregnation of the drug

First, it can be observed in the Figure 35 that after the drug impregnation, the obtained dried

membrane is whiter than the original nanocomposite, confirming the absorption of the drug by

the membrane.

Figure 35 - Visual aspect of the dried BC_PMGly1:3_DCF membrane after the impregnation of the

drug.

Page 49: Louise SAIDI Nanocompósitos de celulose bacteriana/poli(N

Bacterial cellulose /poly (N-methacryloyl glycine) prepared by in situ polymerization for biomedical applications 43/56

Figure 36 compares the FTIR spectrum of both nanocomposites before and after impregnation

and diclofenac alone.

The FTIR spectrum of diclofenac displays several typical absorption peaks, specifically at 3390

cm−1 (N-H stretching), 3030 and 3079 cm-1 (=C-H aromatics), 1572 cm−1 (COO anti-

symmetrical vibration), 1603 cm−1 (C=C ring skeletal vibration), 1350–1250cm−1 (C-N

stretching), and 710–745 cm-1 (C-H out of plane, di- and tri- substituted rings). [37]

Therefore, the impregnation of the drug can be further confirmed by the appearance of the

typical DCF peaks on the spectrum of the impregnated nanocomposite. Indeed, one can easily

distinct on this spectrum the three sharp peaks at 714, 744 and 764 cm-1 corresponding to the out

of plane vibration from the C-H of the aromatic rings and the two peaks at 1280 and 1303 cm-1

matching the stretching of the C-N bonds of diclofenac molecules. However, due to overlapping

or interactions established between diclofenac and the nanocomposites (as suggested by the

spectra of the mixture of the PMGly and diclofenac, PMGly + DCF), some peaks have been

shifted. It is the case for example for the 1715 cm-1 (C=O) peak of PMGly that is shifted to 1684

cm-1 and the one at 1621 cm-1 which moved to 1601 cm-1. Nevertheless, this behaviour must be

investigated in more detail.

Figure 36 - FTIR-ATR spectra of BC, PMGly, DCF and BC_PMGly1:3_DCF.

Drug release test

The diclofenac release from the nanocomposite membranes was tested at pH 7.4 and 2.1 during

24 hours at 37 °C for two different membranes prepared with different amounts of cross-linker

Page 50: Louise SAIDI Nanocompósitos de celulose bacteriana/poli(N

Bacterial cellulose /poly (N-methacryloyl glycine) prepared by in situ polymerization for biomedical applications 44/56

(MBA), namely 5% and 10% (compared to the amount of monomer) because of the results

obtained for the swelling tests. To assess the drug release, the absorbance’s of the solutions

were assessed every hour. Their evolution in function of time are displayed in the Figure 37 and

the FTIR-ATR spectrum of the different nanocomposites before and after the test are shown in

Figure 38.

After observing in the swelling test that part of the polymer can be dissolved from the

nanocomposite, we decided to investigate by FTIR this dissolution after the release test. The

results, with both amount of cross linker, showed the disappearance of the polymer from the

membranes in the case of pH 7.4. Indeed, no typical peaks such as the PMGly/DCF peaks

around 1689 cm-1 or the DCF typical ones around 764 cm-1 are presents on the spectrum. In the

case of pH 2.1, the FTIR spectrum obtained from the nanocomposites are more similar to the

one of the initial membrane, nevertheless, the reduce intensity of the polymer peaks compared

to that of BC suggest a reduction of the polymer amount into the nanocomposite membrane.

Moreover, it has also been confirmed that the polymer absorbed at 276 nm, therefore, it is

impossible to link the absorbance of the solution to the drug concentration in the solution.

However, we can conclude that the higher absorbance obtained at pH 7.4 suggest a higher

dissolution of polymer and diclofenac in neutral conditions than in acidic pH.

In sum, a new way to perform the diclofenac release has to be found, in order to prevent the

dissolution of the polymer. This could be done with even higher amounts of cross-linker.

Figure 37 - Comparison of the absorbance evolution in function of time at pH 7.4 and 2.1 for the

BC _PMGly (1:3)_DCF and BC_PMGly (1:3:10)_DCF nanocomposites; fitting was computed with

Excel.

Page 51: Louise SAIDI Nanocompósitos de celulose bacteriana/poli(N

Bacterial cellulose /poly (N-methacryloyl glycine) prepared by in situ polymerization for biomedical applications 45/56

Figure 38 - FTIR-ATR spectra of BC and BC_PMGly1:3_DCF before and after release test at

different pH (7.4 and 2.1) with different amount of cross linker (5% and 10%)

4.10 Biomineralization of the nanocomposites

Bones are mainly composed of hydroxyapatite (HAp) nanocrystals and collagen. HAp is well

known for its great osteoconductivity and bioactivity, whereas collagen is known for its

susceptibility to mutation. [75] Therefore, even if HAp/collagen nanocomposites have been

studied, [76]–[80] efforts have been made in order to find a material that could overcome

collagen’s issues and BC/HAp and polymeric/HAp nanocomposites have been synthesised and

characterised. [25], [43], [46], [69], [81] BC has been chosen for its peculiar porosity,

mechanical properties, biocompatibility and biodegradability. In that direction, our objective

was to initiate biomimetic apatite formation on our membranes, in order to create a new porous

HAp_BC_PMGly nanocomposite with enhanced properties.

Page 52: Louise SAIDI Nanocompósitos de celulose bacteriana/poli(N

Bacterial cellulose /poly (N-methacryloyl glycine) prepared by in situ polymerization for biomedical applications 46/56

Two nanocomposites membranes (both of them were BC_PMGly nanocomposite with a

BC:monomer ratio of 1:2 however, one of them was freeze dried after polymerization and the

other one was kept in wet state) were biomineralized following the methods described in the

section 3.5. After the biomineralization, half of each membrane was freeze dried and the other

half oven dried at 40 °C. At the end, four different nanocomposites were obtained. Table 6

summarizes the different chosen designation of the samples in function of the applied treatment.

The growth of any minerals was controlled by XRD and SEM.

Table 6: Designation of the different biomineralized samples

After polymerization After biomineralization

Freeze dried Kept in wet state Freeze dried Oven dried

BC_PMGly 1:2 WOD X X

BC_PMGly 1:2 WFD X X

BC_PMGly 1:2 FDOV X X

BC_PMGly 1:2 FDFD X X

4.10.1 X-ray diffraction

X-ray diffractograms of the obtained nanocomposites are shown in Figure 39. The typical

diffractions of BC are not very intense in these diffractograms due to the appearance of two

intense peaks at 32.1°, 45.8°. These peaks were attributed to NaCl in its cubic form for all the

samples using the software High Score version 4.1, suggesting that the formation of

hydroxyapatite did not occur in considerable extension.

Page 53: Louise SAIDI Nanocompósitos de celulose bacteriana/poli(N

Bacterial cellulose /poly (N-methacryloyl glycine) prepared by in situ polymerization for biomedical applications 47/56

Figure 39 - XRD diffractograms of the different biomineralized nanocomposites.

4.10.2 Scanning electron microscopy

The surfaces of the obtained nanocomposites were then analyzed by SEM in order to check the

formation of NaCl and, therefore, confirm the results obtained by XRD. Some micrographs at

magnification of x10k and x30k are shown in the Figure 40 and Figure 41. Additionally, the

elements found by EDX analysis are listed with their estimated amount in the Table 7, while a

typical EDX spectrum is shown in Figure 42.

The formation of mineral particles, indicated by XRD, was confirmed in SEM by the

observation of some spherical and cubic shape inorganic particles on the surface of BC fibers

(Figure 40 and Figure 41). In the same way, the EDX results confirmed the higher abundance of

chlorine and sodium in all the different nanocomposites corroborating the growth of NaCl.

However, the very small or inexistent amount of phosphate and calcium found by EDX again

suggest that the hydroxyapatite hasn’t grown in significant amount. These experiments need to

be repeated and improved aiming to avoid the formation of NaCl that certainly the HAp growth.

Page 54: Louise SAIDI Nanocompósitos de celulose bacteriana/poli(N

Bacterial cellulose /poly (N-methacryloyl glycine) prepared by in situ polymerization for biomedical applications 48/56

Figure 40 - SEM pictures of a) BC-PMGly 1-2_FDFD, b) BC_PMGly 1:2_FDOD, c) BC_PMGly

1:2_WFD, d) BC_PMGly 1:2 WOD at a magnification of x10k

Figure 41 - SEM pictures of a) BC-PMGly 1-2_FDFD, b) BC_PMGly 1:2_FDOD, c) BC_PMGly

1:2_WFD, d) BC_PMGly 1:2 WOD at a magnification of x30k

Page 55: Louise SAIDI Nanocompósitos de celulose bacteriana/poli(N

Bacterial cellulose /poly (N-methacryloyl glycine) prepared by in situ polymerization for biomedical applications 49/56

Table 7: List of the different elements and their concentrations found in the nanocomposites, the

concentrations are given in wt%. The 2 main compounds (besides carbon and oxygen) of the

samples are highlighted in grey.

Na Cl Ca K Mg P

BC_PMGly 1:2 WOD 2.4% 8.0% 1.3% 0.7% 0.5% 0.4%

BC_PMGly 1:2 WFD 7.8% 22.7% 1.4% - 0.7% 0.1%

BC_PMGly 1:2 FDOD 1.2% 6% 3.7% 0.8% 1.4% 1.3%

BC_PMGly 1:2 FDFD 11.7% 20.4% 0.5% 0.3% 0.2% 0.1%

Figure 42 – Typical EDX spectrum obtained with the BC-PMGly 1:2_FDFD nanocomposite

Page 56: Louise SAIDI Nanocompósitos de celulose bacteriana/poli(N

Bacterial cellulose /poly (N-methacryloyl glycine) prepared by in situ polymerization for biomedical applications 50/56

5. Conclusions

In this study, we were able to create novel nanocomposites through the in situ free radical

polymerization of N-methacryloyl glycine into the three dimensional network of bacterial

cellulose using N,N'-methylenebisacrylamide as cross-linker.

This embedment of the polymer into BC resulted into an increase of the mechanical and thermal

properties of the polymer confirming reinforcement ability of BC. Moreover, due to the

amorphous character of the polymer, the obtained nanocomposites had reduced crystallinity and

mechanical properties when compared to BC.

By analysing the influence of the polymer content we can say that increasing amounts of

polymer induced a higher filling of the pores of BC resulting in higher nanocomposite

thicknesses. However, the increase of the polymer content had no significant impact on the

thermal stability of the nanocomposites.

In addition, the polymer incorporation into BC successfully produced non-cytotoxic materials

up to 48 hours of exposure regarding to skin cells and with more than 70% of cell viability for

72 hours of exposure. It was also observed that the increase of the amount of polymer caused a

decrease of the cell viability regarding HaCaT skin cell after more than 24 hours of exposure.

From all nanocomposite prepared, BC_PMGly 1:1 is the one with the highest cell viability,

mechanical resistance and crystallinity.

In terms of the potential applications, we have successfully impregnated diclofenac into our

nanocomposites membranes and were able to release the drug with a controlled behaviour at

both pH 7.4 and 2.1. However, we have noticed the dissolution of the polymer during the

release tests. In addition, the biomineralization of the nanocomposites from a simulated body

solution did not led to the growth of hydroxyapatite particles on our membranes. Indeed, XRD

and SEM analysis have confirmed the growth of NaCl particles, possibly due to water

contamination in the lab.

In the future, further analyses will be made to complete the characterisation of the

nanocomposites; for instance, solid state NMR will be performed on the different membranes

and the effect of the polymer introduction on the cell adhesion will be studied by SEM.

Additionally, the diclofenac release will be tested with higher amounts of cross-linker, and high-

performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) will be used to characterize better the previous

releases. Regarding the biomineralization, tests will be repeated with pure water to assess the

contamination of the sample by NaCl before the reaction and in case of an effective HAp

growth, compressive test will be performed on the membranes. Finally, a new potential

application of the nanocomposite in the field of water purification will also be investigated.

Page 57: Louise SAIDI Nanocompósitos de celulose bacteriana/poli(N

Bacterial cellulose /poly (N-methacryloyl glycine) prepared by in situ polymerization for biomedical applications 51/56

6. References

[1] S. M. Keshk, “Bacterial Cellulose Production and its Industrial Applications,” J. Bioprocess.

Biotech., vol. 04, no. 2, pp. 1–10, 2014.

[2] A. R. P. Figueiredo, C. Vilela, C. P. Neto, A. J. D. Silvestre, and C. S. R. Freire, “Bacterial

cellulose based nanocomposites: a roadmap for innovative materials,” in Nanocellulose Polymer

Nanocomposites, Scrivener., Ed. Vijay Kumar Thakur, Ed. 2014, pp. 17–64.

[3] M. M. Abeer, M. C. I. Mohd Amin, and C. Martin, “A review of bacterial cellulose-based drug

delivery systems: Their biochemistry, current approaches and future prospects,” J. Pharm.

Pharmacol., vol. 66, pp. 1047–1061, 2014.

[4] M. Mazza, “Modification chimique de la cellulose en milieu liquide ionique et CO2

supercritique,” Institut National Polytechnique de Toulouse, 2009.

[5] C. Ververis, K. Georghiou, N. Christodoulakis, P. Santas, and R. Santas, “Fiber dimensions,

lignin and cellulose content of various plant materials and their suitability for paper production,”

Ind. Crops Prod., vol. 19, pp. 245–254, 2004.

[6] “Carbohydrate polymers | A Level Notes.” [Online]. Available:

http://alevelnotes.com/Carbohydrate-polymers/65?tree=. [Accessed: 15-Nov-2014].

[7] R. A. Festucci-Buselli, W. C. Otoni, and C. P. Joshi, “Structure, organization, and functions of

cellulose synthase complexes in higher plants,” Brazilian J. Plant Physiol., vol. 19, no. 1, pp. 1–

13, 2007.

[8] H. H. (Cathy) Wang, “Cellulose and pulp,” in Forest and forest plants, vol. II, Encyclopedia of

Life Support Systems, 2009, p. 344.

[9] S. A. S. Azizi, A. Fannie, and D. Alain, “Review of Recent Research into Cellulosic Whisker,

Their Properties and Their Application in Nanocomposites Field,” Biomacromolecules, vol. 6, pp.

612–626, 2005.

[10] D. P. Delmer and Y. Amor, “Cellulose biosynthesis.,” Plant Cell, vol. 7, no. July, pp. 987–1000,

1995.

[11] Y. Chao, T. Ishida, Y. Sugano, and M. Shoda, “Bacterial cellulose production by Acetobacter

xylinum in a 50-L internal-loop airlift reactor,” Biotechnol. Bioeng., vol. 68, no. 3, pp. 345–352,

2000.

[12] K. Watanabe, M. Tabuchi, Y. Morinaga, and F. Yoshinaga, “Structural Features and Properties of

Bacterial Cellulose Produced in Agitated Culture,” Cellulose, vol. 5, pp. 187–200, 1998.

[13] S. Yamanaka, K. Watanabe, N. Kitamura, M. Iguchi, S. Mitsuhashi, Y. Nishi, and M. Uryu, “The

structure and mechanical properties of sheets prepared from bacterial cellulose,” J. Mater. Sci.,

vol. 24, pp. 3141–3145, 1989.

[14] W. K. Czaja, D. J. Young, M. Kawecki, and R. M. Brown, “The future prospects of microbial

cellulose in biomedical applications,” Biomacromolecules, vol. 8, no. 1, pp. 1–12, 2007.

[15] D. Kralisch, N. Hessler, D. Klemm, R. Erdmann, and W. Schmidt, “White biotechnology for

cellulose manufacturing - The HoLiR concept,” Biotechnol. Bioeng., vol. 105, no. 4, pp. 740–747,

2010.

Page 58: Louise SAIDI Nanocompósitos de celulose bacteriana/poli(N

Bacterial cellulose /poly (N-methacryloyl glycine) prepared by in situ polymerization for biomedical applications 52/56

[16] S. P. Lin, S. C. Hsieh, K. I. Chen, A. Demirci, and K. C. Cheng, “Semi-continuous bacterial

cellulose production in a rotating disk bioreactor and its materials properties analysis,” Cellulose,

vol. 21, pp. 835–844, 2014.

[17] M. Hornung, M. Ludwig, and H. P. Schmauder, “Optimizing the production of bacterial cellulose

in surface culture: A novel aerosol bioreactor working on a fed batch principle (Part 3),” Eng. Life

Sci., vol. 7, no. 1, pp. 35–41, 2007.

[18] H. Cheng, P. Wang, J. Chen, and W. Wu, “Cultivation of Acetobacter xylinum for bacterial

cellulose production in a modified airlift reactor,” Biotechnol. Appl. Biochem., vol. 35, no. 2, pp.

125–132, Apr. 2002.

[19] S. Hestrin and M. Schramm, “Synthesis of cellulose by Acetobacter xylinum. 2. Preparation of

freeze-dried cells capable of polymerizing glucose to cellulose,” Biochem. J., vol. 58, pp. 345–

352, 1954.

[20] S.-Y. Kim, J.-N. Kim, Y.-J. Wee, D.-H. Park, and H.-W. Ryu, “Production of bacterial cellulose

by Gluconacetobacter sp. RKY5 isolated from persimmon vinegar,” Appl. Biochem. Biotechnol.,

vol. 131, pp. 705–715, 2006.

[21] D. Klemm, B. Heublein, H. P. Fink, and A. Bohn, “Cellulose: Fascinating biopolymer and

sustainable raw material,” Angew. Chemie - Int. Ed., vol. 44, pp. 3358–3393, 2005.

[22] F. Lina, Z. Yue, Z. Jin, and Y. Guang, “Bacterial Cellulose for Skin Repair Materials,” in

Biomedical Engineering – Frontiers and Challenges, R. Fazel-Rezai, Ed. 2011, pp. 250–274.

[23] H. S. Barud, T. Regiani, R. F. C. Marques, W. R. Lustri, Y. Messaddeq, and S. J. L. Ribeiro,

“Antimicrobial bacterial cellulose-silver nanoparticles composite membranes,” J. Nanomater.,

vol. 2011, 2011.

[24] P. R. Chawla, I. B. Bajaj, S. a. Survase, and R. S. Singhal, “Microbial cellulose: Fermentative

production and applications ( Review ),” Food Technol. Biotechnol., vol. 47, no. 2, pp. 107–124,

2009.

[25] Y. Z. Wan, L. Hong, S. R. Jia, Y. Huang, Y. Zhu, Y. L. Wang, and H. J. Jiang, “Synthesis and

characterization of hydroxyapatite-bacterial cellulose nanocomposites,” Compos. Sci. Technol.,

vol. 66, pp. 1825–1832, 2006.

[26] D. Klemm, F. Kramer, S. Moritz, T. Lindström, M. Ankerfors, D. Gray, and A. Dorris,

“Nanocelluloses: A new family of nature-based materials,” Angew. Chemie - Int. Ed., vol. 50, pp.

5438–5466, 2011.

[27] S. Binet, S. Malard, M. Ricaud, and B. Savary, “Fibres de cellulose.” p. 9, 2011.

[28] N. Halib, M. C. I. M. Amin, and I. Ahmad, “Physicochemical Properties and Characterization of

Nata de Coco from Local Food Industries as a Source of Cellulose,” Sains Malaysiana, vol. 41,

no. 2, pp. 205–211, 2012.

[29] D. Klemm, D. Schumann, F. Kramer, N. Heßler, M. Hornung, H. P. Schmauder, and S. Marsch,

“Nanocelluloses as innovative polymers in research and application,” Adv. Polym. Sci., vol. 205,

no. August, pp. 49–96, 2006.

[30] N. Hasan, D. R. A. Biak, and S. Kamarudin, “Application of Bacterial Cellulose ( BC ) in Natural

Facial Scrub,” Int. J. Adv. Sci. Eng. Inf. Tecnhology2, vol. 2, no. 4, pp. 1–4, 2012.

Page 59: Louise SAIDI Nanocompósitos de celulose bacteriana/poli(N

Bacterial cellulose /poly (N-methacryloyl glycine) prepared by in situ polymerization for biomedical applications 53/56

[31] T. Amnuaikit, T. Chusuit, P. Raknam, and P. Boonme, “Effects of a cellulose mask synthesized

by a bacterium on facial skin characteristics and user satisfaction,” Med. Devices Evid. Res., vol.

4, pp. 77–81, 2011.

[32] M. Scherner, S. Reutter, D. Klemm, A. Sterner-Kock, M. Guschlbauer, T. Richter, G.

Langebartels, N. Madershahian, T. Wahlers, and J. Wippermann, “In vivo application of tissue-

engineered blood vessels of bacterial cellulose as small arterial substitutes: Proof of concept?,” J.

Surg. Res., vol. 189, no. 2, pp. 340–347, 2014.

[33] A. J. D. Silvestre, C. S. R. Freire, and C. P. Neto, “Do bacterial cellulose membranes have

potential in drug delivery systems?,” vol. 11, no. 7, pp. 1113–1124, 2014.

[34] E. Trovatti, N. H. C. S. Silva, I. F. Duarte, C. F. Rosado, I. F. Almeida, P. Costa, C. S. R. Freire,

A. J. D. Silvestre, and C. P. Neto, “Biocellulose membranes as supports for dermal release of

lidocaine,” Biomacromolecules, vol. 12, pp. 4162–4168, 2011.

[35] E. Trovatti, C. S. R. Freire, P. C. Pinto, I. F. Almeida, P. Costa, A. J. D. Silvestre, C. P. Neto, and

C. Rosado, “Bacterial cellulose membranes applied in topical and transdermal delivery of

lidocaine hydrochloride and ibuprofen: In vitro diffusion studies,” Int. J. Pharm., vol. 435, no. 1,

pp. 83–87, 2012.

[36] N. H. C. S. Silva, I. Drumond, I. F. Almeida, P. Costa, C. F. Rosado, C. P. Neto, C. S. R. Freire,

and A. J. D. Silvestre, “Topical caffeine delivery using biocellulose membranes: A potential

innovative system for cellulite treatment,” Cellulose, vol. 21, pp. 665–674, 2014.

[37] N. H. C. S. Silva, A. F. Rodrigues, I. F. Almeida, P. C. Costa, C. Rosado, C. P. Neto, A. J. D.

Silvestre, and C. S. R. Freire, “Bacterial cellulose membranes as transdermal delivery systems for

diclofenac: In vitro dissolution and permeation studies,” Carbohydr. Polym., vol. 106, pp. 264–

269, 2014.

[38] M. C. I. M. Amin, A. G. Abadi, N. Ahmad, H. Katas, and J. A. Jamal, “Bacterial cellulose film

coating as drug delivery system: Physicochemical, thermal and drug release properties,” Sains

Malaysiana, vol. 41, no. 5, pp. 561–568, 2012.

[39] I. F. Almeida, T. Pereira, N. H. C. S. Silva, F. P. Gomes, a. J. D. Silvestre, C. S. R. Freire, J. M.

Sousa Lobo, and P. C. Costa, “Bacterial cellulose membranes as drug delivery systems: An in

vivo skin compatibility study,” Eur. J. Pharm. Biopharm., vol. 86, no. 3, pp. 332–336, 2014.

[40] L. Huang, X. Chen, T. X. Nguyen, H. Tang, L. Zhang, and G. Yang, “Nano-cellulose 3D-

networks as controlled-release drug carriers,” J. Mater. Chem. B, vol. 1, no. 23, p. 2976, 2013.

[41] T. Maneerung, S. Tokura, and R. Rujiravanit, “Impregnation of silver nanoparticles into bacterial

cellulose for antimicrobial wound dressing,” Carbohydr. Polym., vol. 72, no. 1, pp. 43–51, Apr.

2008.

[42] R. J. B. Pinto, P. A. A. P. Marques, C. P. Neto, T. Trindade, S. Daina, and P. Sadocco,

“Antibacterial activity of nanocomposites of silver and bacterial or vegetable cellulosic fibers.,”

Acta Biomater., vol. 5, no. 6, pp. 2279–89, Jul. 2009.

[43] C. J. Grande, F. G. Torres, C. M. Gomez, and M. Carmen Bañó, “Nanocomposites of bacterial

cellulose/hydroxyapatite for biomedical applications,” Acta Biomater., vol. 5, pp. 1605–1615,

2009.

[44] L. Hong, Y. L. Wang, S. R. Jia, Y. Huang, C. Gao, and Y. Z. Wan, “Hydroxyapatite/bacterial

cellulose composites synthesized via a biomimetic route,” Mater. Lett., vol. 60, no. 13–14, pp.

1710–1713, 2006.

Page 60: Louise SAIDI Nanocompósitos de celulose bacteriana/poli(N

Bacterial cellulose /poly (N-methacryloyl glycine) prepared by in situ polymerization for biomedical applications 54/56

[45] K. Peng, B. Wang, S. Chen, C. Zhong, and H. Wang, “Preparation and Properties of

Polystyrene/Bacterial Cellulose Nanocomposites by In Situ Polymerization,” J. Macromol. Sci.

Part B Phys., vol. 50, no. 10, pp. 1921–1927, 2011.

[46] Y. Z. Wan, Y. Huang, C. D. Yuan, S. Raman, Y. Zhu, H. J. Jiang, F. He, and C. Gao,

“Biomimetic synthesis of hydroxyapatite/bacterial cellulose nanocomposites for biomedical

applications,” Mater. Sci. Eng. C, vol. 27, no. 4, pp. 855–864, 2007.

[47] H. Zhu, S. Jia, T. Wan, Y. Jia, H. Yang, J. Li, L. Yan, and C. Zhong, “Biosynthesis of spherical

Fe3O4/bacterial cellulose nanocomposites as adsorbents for heavy metal ions,” Carbohydr.

Polym., vol. 86, no. 4, pp. 1558–1564, Oct. 2011.

[48] S. Yano, H. Maeda, M. Nakajima, T. Hagiwara, and T. Sawaguchi, “Preparation and mechanical

properties of bacterial cellulose nanocomposites loaded with silica nanoparticles,” Cellulose, vol.

15, pp. 111–120, 2008.

[49] S. P. Lin, I. Loira Calvar, J. M. Catchmark, J. R. Liu, A. Demirci, and K. C. Cheng,

“Biosynthesis, production and applications of bacterial cellulose,” Cellulose, vol. 20, pp. 2191–

2219, 2013.

[50] D. Muller, C. R. Rambo, L. M. Porto, W. H. Schreiner, and G. M. O. Barra, “Structure and

properties of polypyrrole/bacterial cellulose nanocomposites,” Carbohydr. Polym., vol. 94, no. 1,

pp. 655–662, 2013.

[51] B. H. Lee, H. J. Kim, and H. S. Yang, “Polymerization of aniline on bacterial cellulose and

characterization of bacterial cellulose/polyaniline nanocomposite films,” Curr. Appl. Phys., vol.

12, no. 1, pp. 75–80, 2012.

[52] X. W. Yuan, D. Liu, a J. Easteal, D. Bhattacharyya, J. Li, and N. Zealand, “Preparation of Poly- (

Lactic Acid ) Scaffolds Reinforced With Bacterial Cellulose Nano- Fibres,” in 17th international

conference on composite materials, 2009.

[53] I. M. G. Martins, S. P. Magina, L. Oliveira, C. S. R. Freire, A. J. D. Silvestre, C. P. Neto, and A.

Gandini, “New biocomposites based on thermoplastic starch and bacterial cellulose,” Compos.

Sci. Technol., vol. 69, no. 13, pp. 2163–2168, Oct. 2009.

[54] N. Butchosa, C. Brown, P. T. Larsson, L. a. Berglund, V. Bulone, and Q. Zhou, “Nanocomposites

of bacterial cellulose nanofibers and chitin nanocrystals: fabrication, characterization and

bactericidal activity,” Green Chem., vol. 15, p. 3404, 2013.

[55] E. E. Brown and M. G. Laborie, “Bioengineering Bacterial Cellulose / Poly ( ethylene oxide )

Nanocomposites,” Biomacromolecules, vol. 8, pp. 3074–3081, 2007.

[56] C. Castro, A. Vesterinen, R. Zuluaga, G. Caro, I. Filpponen, O. J. Rojas, G. Kortaberria, and P.

Gañán, “In situ production of nanocomposites of poly(vinyl alcohol) and cellulose nanofibrils

from Gluconacetobacter bacteria: Effect of chemical crosslinking,” Cellulose, vol. 21, pp. 1745–

1756, 2014.

[57] Z. Cai and J. Kim, “Bacterial cellulose/poly(ethylene glycol) composite: characterization and first

evaluation of biocompatibility,” Cellulose, vol. 17, no. 1, pp. 83–91, Sep. 2009.

[58] C. Zhijiang, Y. Guang, and J. Kim, “Biocompatible nanocomposites prepared by impregnating

bacterial cellulose nanofibrils into poly(3-hydroxybutyrate),” Curr. Appl. Phys., vol. 11, no. 2, pp.

247–249, Mar. 2011.

Page 61: Louise SAIDI Nanocompósitos de celulose bacteriana/poli(N

Bacterial cellulose /poly (N-methacryloyl glycine) prepared by in situ polymerization for biomedical applications 55/56

[59] Y. Kim, R. Jung, H.-S. Kim, and H.-J. Jin, “Transparent nanocomposites prepared by

incorporating microbial nanofibrils into poly(l-lactic acid),” Curr. Appl. Phys., vol. 9, no. 1, pp.

S69–S71, Jan. 2009.

[60] H. S. Barud and S. J. L. Ribeiro, “Optically Transparent Membrane Based on Bacterial Cellulose

/ Polycaprolactone,” Polimeros, vol. 23, no. 1, pp. 135–138, 2013.

[61] J. a. Marins, B. G. Soares, K. Dahmouche, S. J. L. Ribeiro, H. Barud, and D. Bonemer, “Structure

and properties of conducting bacterial cellulose-polyaniline nanocomposites,” Cellulose, vol. 18,

pp. 1285–1294, 2011.

[62] A. G. P. R. Figueiredo, A. R. P. Figueiredo, A. Alonso-Varona, S. C. M. Fernandes, T.

Palomares, E. Rubio-Azpeitia, A. Barros-Timmons, A. J. D. Silvestre, C. Pascoal Neto, and C. S.

R. Freire, “Biocompatible bacterial cellulose-poly(2-hydroxyethyl methacrylate) nanocomposite

films,” Biomed Res. Int., vol. 2013, 2013.

[63] R. Hobzova, M. Duskova-Smrckova, J. Michalek, E. Karpushkin, and P. Gatenholm,

“Methacrylate hydrogels reinforced with bacterial cellulose,” Polym. Int., vol. 61, no. 7, pp.

1193–1201, Jul. 2012.

[64] F. Kramer, D. Klemm, D. Schumann, N. Heßler, F. Wesarg, W. Fried, and D. Stadermann,

“Nanocellulose polymer composites as innovative pool for (Bio)material development,”

Macromol. Symp., vol. 244, pp. 136–148, 2006.

[65] P. S. S. Lacerda, A. M. M. V Barros-Timmons, C. S. R. Freire, A. J. D. Silvestre, and C. P. Neto,

“Nanostructured composites obtained by ATRP sleeving of bacterial cellulose nanofibers with

acrylate polymers,” Biomacromolecules, vol. 14, pp. 2063–2073, 2013.

[66] T. D. O. Gadim, A. G. P. R. Figueiredo, N. C. Rosero-Navarro, C. Vilela, J. a F. Gamelas, A.

Barros-Timmons, C. P. Neto, A. J. D. Silvestre, C. S. R. Freire, and F. M. L. Figueiredo,

“Nanostructured bacterial cellulose-poly(4-styrene sulfonic acid) composite membranes with high

storage modulus and protonic conductivity,” ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces, vol. 6, pp. 7864–7875,

2014.

[67] P. Carreira, J. A. . Mendes, and E. Trovatti, “Utilization of residues from agro-forest industries in

the production of high value bacterial cellulose,” Bioresour. Technol., vol. 102, no. 15, pp. 7354–

7360, 2011.

[68] E. Trovatti, L. S. Serafim, C. S. R. Freire, A. J. D. Silvestre, and C. P. Neto, “Gluconacetobacter

sacchari: An efficient bacterial cellulose cell-factory,” Carbohydr. Polym., vol. 86, no. 3, pp.

1417–1420, 2011.

[69] A. L. Oliveira, P. B. Malafaya, and R. L. Reis, “Sodium silicate gel as a precursor for the in vitro

nucleation and growth of a bone-like apatite coating in compact and porous polymeric

structures,” Biomaterials, vol. 24, no. 15, pp. 2575–2584, 2003.

[70] A. Oyane, H.-M. Kim, T. Furuya, T. Kokubo, T. Miyazaki, and T. Nakamura, “Preparation and

assessment of revised simulated body fluids.,” J. Biomed. Mater. Res. A, vol. 65, no. 2, pp. 188–

195, 2003.

[71] P. Boukamp, R. T. Petrussevska, D. Breitkreutz, J. Hornung, A. Markham, and N. E. Fusenig,

“Normal Keratinization in a Spontaneously Immortalized Aneuploid Human Keratinocyte Cell

Line,” J. Cell Biol., vol. 106, no. March, pp. 761–771, 1988.

[72] A. R. P. Figueiredo, “Novos nanocompósitos de celulose bacteriana preparados por polimrização

in situ,” Universidade de Aveiro, 2013.

Page 62: Louise SAIDI Nanocompósitos de celulose bacteriana/poli(N

Bacterial cellulose /poly (N-methacryloyl glycine) prepared by in situ polymerization for biomedical applications 56/56

[73] H. S. Barud, J. L. Souza, D. B. Santos, M. S. Crespi, C. A. Ribeiro, Y. Messaddeq, and S. J. L.

Ribeiro, “Bacterial cellulose/poly(3-hydroxybutyrate) composite membranes,” Carbohydr.

Polym., vol. 83, pp. 1279–1284, 2011.

[74] “Diclofenac Uses, Dosage & Side Effects - Drugs.com.” [Online]. Available:

http://www.drugs.com/diclofenac.html. [Accessed: 23-Mar-2015].

[75] H. Lodish, A. Berk, S. L. Zipursky, P. Matsudaira, D. Baltimore, and J. Darnell, “Collagen: The

Fibrous Proteins of the Matrix,” in Molecular cell biology, 4th edition, W. H. Freeman, 2000.

[76] D. Lickorish, J. a M. Ramshaw, J. a Werkmeister, V. Glattauer, and C. R. Howlett, “Collagen-

hydroxyapatite composite prepared by biomimetic process.,” J. Biomed. Mater. Res. A, vol. 68,

no. 1, pp. 19–27, 2004.

[77] J. Wang and C. Liu, “Biomimetic Collagen/Hydroxyapatite Composite Scaffolds: Fabrication and

Characterizations,” J. Bionic Eng., vol. 11, no. 4, pp. 600–609, 2014.

[78] Q. Wei, J. Lu, Q. Wang, H. Fan, and X. Zhang, “Novel synthesis strategy for composite hydrogel

of collagen/hydroxyapatite-microsphere originating from conversion of CaCO 3 templates,”

Nanotechnology, vol. 26, no. 11, p. 115605, 2015.

[79] L. Ning, H. Malmström, and Y.-F. Ren, “Porous Collagen-Hydroxyapatite Scaffolds With

Mesenchymal Stem Cells for Bone Regeneration,” J. Oral Implantol., vol. 41, no. 1, pp. 45–49,

2015.

[80] F. Wenpo, L. Gaofeng, F. Shuying, Q. Yuanming, and T. Keyong, “Preparation and

characterization of collagen–hydroxyapatite/pectin composite,” Int. J. Biol. Macromol., vol. 74,

pp. 218–223, 2015.

[81] A. H. Ambre, D. R. Katti, and K. S. Katti, “Biomineralized hydroxyapatite nanoclay composite

scaffolds with polycaprolactone for stem cell-based bone tissue engineering,” J. Biomed. Mater.

Res. Part A, vol. 103, no. 6, pp. 2077–2101, 2015.


Recommended