Lignocellulose nanofiber and starch for surface application on recycled linerboard

Hasanpour, G., Khosravani, A., Tajvidi , M., and Rezayati Charani , P. (2024). "Lignocellulose nanofiber and starch for surface application on recycled linerboard," BioResources 19(4), 8188–8201.

Abstract

In a paper production line, starch is widely used for surface treatment and strengthening of linerboard at a size press. Also, the application of lignocellulose nanofibers (LCNFs) is growing because of its relatively low production energy demand, cost, and less hydrophilic nature in comparison to lignin-free nanofibers. Therefore, the addition of LCNFs to starch for paper surface treatment to reinforce the starch film and improve certain physical and mechanical properties of recycled linerboard was investigated in this work. Various LCNF/starch ratios were homogenized and then applied on the paperboard surface. The results revealed that a low mixing ratio of LCNF (5%) with starch improved the tensile index of the recycled paperboard, and at 50% LCNF content in the surface-treating material, film forming on the linerboard was observed in field emission-scanning electron microscopy images. In the case of 95% LCNF addition to starch, bending stiffness was significantly increased. Additionally, the viscosity of the sizing suspension was studied as a crucial parameter in the process and was found to increase significantly following the addition of LCNF.

Download PDF

Full Article

Lignocellulose Nanofiber and Starch for Surface Application on Recycled Linerboard

Ghazal Hasanpour,^a Amir Khosravani,^b,* Mehdi Tajvidi,^cand Pejman Rezayati Charani^d

DOI: 10.15376/biores.19.4.8188-8201

Keywords: Lignocellulose nanofiber; Cationic starch; Surface application; Surface sizing

Contact information: a: MSc graduate, Department of Wood and Paper Science and Technology, Faculty of Natural Resources, Tarbiat Modares University, 4641776489 Mazandaran, Noor, Iran; b: Department of Wood and Paper Science and Technology, Faculty of Natural Resources, Tarbiat Modares University, 4641776489 Mazandaran, Noor, Iran; c: School of Forest Resources, Advanced Structures and Composites Center and Forest Bioproducts Research Institute, University of Maine, Orono, ME, USA; d: Department of Wood and Paper Science and Technology, Faculty of Natural Resources, Behbahan Khatam Alanbia University of Technology, Iran; *Corresponding author: khosravani@modares.ac.ir

INTRODUCTION

Various chemicals are used in paper production lines to improve the product quality or process parameters. These chemicals can be added into the furnish prior to the paper sheet forming process or through paper surface treatment (Maurer 2009; Shen et al. 2011).

As a common group of surface treatment chemicals, surface sizing materials are generally applied to inhibit water absorption to the paper, while filling the paper surface pores and voids and improving the strength properties (Maurer 2009; Moutinho et al. 2009). Various starch derivatives, some hydrophobic materials, and synthetic polymers are common sizing chemical ingredients for such purposes (Koskela and Hormi 2003; Laleg 2004; Lertsutthiwong et al. 2004; Mesic et al. 2004; Moutinho et al. 2007).

For surface treatment, a variety of starches, such as oxidized, native, cationic, and anionic starches, are used. Oxidized starch has excellent film-forming properties for surface treatment (Maurer 2009). In contrast, the use of cationic starch is increasing, as it results in oxygen demand reduction in the effluent by interacting with fibers and anionic fillers, leading to a significant reduction of suspended solids and chemical oxygen demand (COD) in the wastewater of the paper mill (Maurer 2009).

In contrast, the use of nanocellulose for packaging and surface treatment of paper has been widely studied (Olsson et al. 2011; Lavoine et al. 2012; Paunonen 2013; Brodin et al. 2014; Cowie et al. 2014; Bradet and Bras 2015; Li et al. 2015; Hubbe et al. 2017; Vaezi et al. 2019; Sharma et al. 2020). Shatkin et al. (2014) stated that nanocellulose has great potential for use in paper and packaging applications. Meanwhile, in recent years, the demand for paper and board packaging materials has increased as an alternative to plastic materials, which have an extremely long biodegradation period (Olsson et al. 2011; Paunonen 2013).

Yang et al. (2014) reviewed the surface sizing using cationic starch and nanocrystalline cellulose. The results showed an increase in mechanical properties, including tensile index, tear index, bending stiffness, and burst. At a low coating weight, CNF coatings improve the strength properties. Further, paperboard with CNF coating shows excellent barrier properties to air, grease, and oil, and the water vapor transmission rate (WVTR) is significantly improved (Kumar et al. 2016).

Some researchers have proposed a mix of nanofiber / nanocrystalline cellulose with cationic starch in a coating formulation can work as enhancer agents for mechanical, air-resistance, and optical properties of paper (Cheng et al. 2017; Veazi et al. 2019; Sharma et al. 2020; Fidan et al. 2021).

Among cellulose nanomaterials, recently extensive research has been conducted on the production and some applications of lignocellulose nanofibers (LCNFs) (Gu et al. 2019; Yousefhashemi et al. 2019; Amini et al. 2020; Solala et al. 2020; Tayeb et al. 2020). The LCNFs are delicate fibrillar lignocellulose structures, generally with nano-size diameter and a couple of micrometers length. In comparison to cellulose nano-fibers (CNFs) that are produced from bleached pulp, LCNFs can be isolated from lignin-containing fibers such as thermo-mechanical pulp (TMP), unbleached chemical pulp, or recycled old corrugated container (OCC) pulp (Gu et al. 2019; Yousefhashemi et al. 2019; Tayeb et al. 2020). Following successful isolation and application of lignocellulose nanofibrils from such source materials for various end uses, there is no need for complete delignification, purification, and yield reduction (Bardet and Bras 2014; Delgado-Aguilar et al. 2016). Amini et al. (2020) reviewed physical and mechanical properties of LCNF and CNF films and proposed that the use of LCNF could provide an opportunity to reduce costs.

Tayeb et al. (2020) used an LCNF layer for coating the packaging paper. The results showed the ability of LCNF layer against penetration of cooking oils for 5 months and improvement in tensile strength.

In LCNFs, the lignin inherently possesses a hydrophobic nature. LCNFs can also be used to improve the mechanical properties and can be used to improve the quality of starch film in surface treatment (sizing/coating) process on a brown recycled linerboard. The LCNF and the recycled linerboard are of similar brown color. Therefore, in this research, the effect of LCNFs (isolated from recycled OCC fibers) in a mixture with starch on surface properties and enhancement of certain physical and mechanical properties of the produced recycled linerboard was investigated.

EXPERIMENTAL

Materials

In this study, as a base paper, a recycled linerboard roll was provided by a local paper mill (Mazandaran, Iran). In the production process of the mentioned paper roll, no additive or sizing material or calendaring process had been applied. Cationic quaternary tapioca starch (degree of substitution: 0.018 mol/mol) was provided from Siam Modified Starch Co. (Thailand).

Lignocellulose nanofibers (LCNFs) were produced from recycled linerboard by an ultra-fine grinding method (MKCA6-2; Masuko Co., Japan) by three passes, at 1800 rpm, while disk distance was less than 600 µm. The fibril diameter range of the isolated LCNFs were 10 to 80 nm (mostly 30 to 50 nm), and the appearance was in the form of brown LCNF gel (Nano Novin Polymer Co., Mazandaran, Iran) that was kept in refrigerator at 4 °C. More details about the isolated LCNF from the recycled linerboard were described in Yousefhashemi et al. (2019).

Methods

Preparation and application of surface treating material

To prepare cationic starch (CS), the starch suspension (different concentrations: 1 to 8% (w/w)) was kept stirring and gently heated up to 90 °C for 30 min. Then, it was kept at this temperature for 30 min. Finally, the solution was cooled to ambient temperature and used for the experiments.

If required, LCNF (4%, w/w gel) was added to the starch (4%, w/w) solution. The addition of LCNF to CS of high concentrations (more than 4%) resulted in high viscosities that made the evenly distributed application of sizing impossible. Therefore, LCNF gel was only applied in mixture with CS: 4% (Table 1). The mixing ratios of LCNF in total solid material of sizing were 5, 50, and 95%, as presented in Table 1.

Table 1. Ingredients of Various Sizing Material Mixtures

As the fibrillated cellulose materials show shear-thinning behavior, all the resulting mixtures were homogenized with a homogenizer for 1 min to have the same pre-shear condition. Then, the suspensions were tested for viscosity with a Wiggen Hauser, D-500 viscometer (Germany). The homogenized mixtures were spread uniformly and similar to a size press. The paperboard with the applied film was placed under constant linear pressure of about 500 g/cm by rolling between two metal surfaces. Then, the treated paperboard samples were fixed for drying in TAPPI drying rings (according to TAPPI T205 sp-02 2002) for 24 h at 40 °C in an oven equipped with ventilation system.

Fig. 1. Surface application of LCNF and starch on recycled OCC paperboard

Evaluation of the paper samples

Field emission scanning electron microscope (FE-SEM) images were taken on a ZEISS FE-SEM microscope, with voltage of 5 kV, at various magnifications. For this purpose, prior to FE-SEM imaging, the paper specimens were coated with a gold sputtering technique.

Tensile, tear, bending indices, and ring crush values were obtained according to TAPPI T494 om-01 (2001), TAPPI T414 om-04 (2004), SCAN-P 29:95 (1995), and TAPPI T818 cm-97 (1997), respectively.

Contact angle of water droplet on the sample surface was evaluated using a PG-X Goniometer (FIBRO System AB, Stockholm, Sweden) with a droplet volume of 30 µL, at 23 °C and 50% relative humidity (RH). Additionally, Cobb test results were collected according to TAPPI T441 om-04 (2004).

Statistical analysis

To identify the statistically significant variances, the analysis of variance (ANOVA) method was used (SPSS software, SPSS Inc., Version 16.0, Chicago, IL, USA). The data were presented as mean ± standard error, and if required, the mean comparisons were done using Duncan’s multiple range test at 95% confidence level. Small alphabet letters in the charts indicate the results of the comparisons. The same letters show there is no statistically significant difference between the means and those that are in the same group.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

FE-SEM micrographs

The FE-SEM images of test specimens following various surface treatments are shown in Fig. 2. The micrographs of the surface of paper samples showed that the sizing materials were successful to cover the pores and voids on the surface, especially in the case of CS containing 50% LCNF (CS 4+LCNF 50%), while surface treatment by CS 4% resulted in no significant film forming on the surface (Fig. 2). This observation can be attributed to the rheological behavior of the sizing mixture, as the addition of LCNF to CS increased the viscosity significantly (Fig. 3). Further, this shows that LCNF addition to the sizing mixture improved film-forming properties of sizing material on the paperboard. Figure 2 demonstrates that the addition of 50% LCNF (CS 4 + % 50 LCNF) helped form a rather complete film on the paperboard surface.

Fig. 2. The FE-SEM images from the surface of recycled linerboard following application of various sizing mixtures (A: untreated base paper; B: surface treated by CS 4%; C: surface treated by CS 4 + LCNF 5%; D: surface treated by CS 4 + LCNF 50%; a, b and d are the same surface as A, B and D, respectively, but at 2 kX magnification)

Viscosity

The viscosity of the sizing solution/colloid material can affect its penetration or surface covering process during the surface treatment of paperboard. Therefore, this property was evaluated and analyzed.

It is generally believed that starches with low viscosity values have more potential to penetrate the paper structure. In contrast, at higher viscosity values, it is more probable that a starch solution will form a thin layer film (coating) on the paper structure due to the fact that it cannot readily penetrate into the pores of the paperboard surface.

As shown in Fig. 3, by increasing the starch concentration, the viscosity increased up to 1200 mPa.s. Moreover, following addition of LCNFs to the starch, the viscosity was greatly increased so that in the 4+LCNF 50%, it reached very high value of 36000 mPa.s. However, it is noteworthy that for 4+LCNF 95%, too much LCNF share in the mixture resulted in a decrease in viscosity (Fig. 3).

Fig. 3. Viscosity of prepared sizing material following homogenizing

Tensile index

Treated papers were evaluated for tensile index. Various shares of starch and LCNF were applied on paper, and the average tensile indices were compared with untreated (control) paper (Fig. 4). According to Fig. 4, the tensile index of the treated papers increased from 29 up to 45 Nm/g following the surface treatment with starch. It is well-known that tensile index is influenced by bonding strength and bonded area in the sheet, fiber strength, length, orientation, shape, and distribution (Taipale et al. 2010; Brodin et al. 2014). Because most of the recently noted effective parameters (related to fiber as length, distribution, etc.) were set to be constant in this research, the remaining effective item was bonding strength and bonded area. Ekhtera et al. (2008), reported increase of tensile index by surface treatment of paper with starch. Starch can penetrate the paperboard structure and so, it is proposed to enhance bonding strength or to develop bonded area (Biricik et al. 2011; Tutus et al. 2017).

Figure 4 also indicates that grammage of paperboard increased when starch at high concentrations were applied. This shows that more starch was absorbed to the paper, although the increase in tensile index was not significant for 4 to 8% starch concentrations. The result can be attributed to the starch penetration and absorption to the paper porous structure. This reveals that starch is not able to improve tensile index in cases where it cannot penetrate the paper structure.

Furthermore, with 5% LCNF addition, the tensile index showed another significant increase and reached to 53 Nm/g. The observation should be due to LCNF role in the starch film. LCNF is a network fibrillar structure and this structure helps strengthening of paper structure or the starch film. Higher amounts of LCNF (more than 5%) could not improve tensile index, which can be attributed to higher viscosities of the sizing mixture. High viscosity value of sizing mixture makes penetration into the paper structure difficult; therefore, this decreases sizing mixture contribution to the tensile index improvement.

Fig. 4. The effect of surface treatment of additives on tensile strength index

Tear index

According to Fig. 5, the tear resistance index increased with the addition of 1% and 2% CS; a similar result has been reported by Kassem et al. (2009). Tear resistance changes mostly when average fiber length, individual fiber strength, or bonding are affected. Therefore, where fiber length and strength remained unchanged, the improvement of bonding in the sheet structure can be the most probable reason for tear index enhancement.

However, this resistance index no longer showed a significant increase with increasing starch concentration (Fig. 5).

Fig. 5. The effect of surface treatment of additives on tear index

This observation can be due to less penetration of starch with high concentrations while this starch increases the grammage of the sheet (Fig. 5). Because the tear index is the result of dividing the resistance by grammage, where the resistance does not increase as much as the sheet grammage, therefore, the resulted index cannot show an increasing trend.

Bending resistance index

The paperboard bending resistance index was another measured strength parameter, which was statistically analyzed due to its importance for packaging. As shown in Fig. 6, the bending resistance index showed a significant increase following the surface treatment of paperboard with cationic starch or any other CS – LCNF mixture used. However, no statistically significant difference was observed due to the starch concentration. But the amount of this resistance increased by the addition of LCNFs so that with 4+LCNF 95% surface treatment, it reached 15.0 (N.m⁶/kg³), almost 1.7 times that of the control sample (SCAN-P 29:95 1995).

In contrast, bending resistance is highly affected by thickness of the paperboard (Yusefhashemi et al. 2019). The average thicknesses of the paperboard specimens are reported in Fig. 6. Therefore, eventually the results in Fig. 6 are the consequence of changes in thickness, and modulus of elasticity of surface treated paperboards.

Fig. 6. The effect of surface treatment of additives on bending resistance index

Ring crush test (RCT)

According to Fig. 7, the surface application of cationic starch with optimum concentration (CS 4%) increased the ring crush test (RCT) values. The data showed that higher concentrations of CS were too viscous to be homogenously applied on the paperboard sheet and therefore resulted in less RCT values. The RCT of 4+LCNF 5% treated paper was not significantly different from the CS 4% treated sample, although it was 1.74 times as much as the control paperboard. Moreover, with more LCNF in the CS-LCNF mixture, the RCT was reduced again probably due to increasing the viscosity of sizing material mixture (Fig. 3), which inevitably deteriorates the homogenous application.

Fig. 7. The effect of surface treatment of additives on ring crush test

Table 2. The Effect of Surface Sizing Treatment on the CA of Water Droplet

Contact angle and Cobb value

The initial contact angle (CA) of a water droplet (at collision moment) is governed to the affinity of the surface toward water, which shows the effect of surface treatment on wettability. Other factors, such as porous structure of paper and surface quality also affect CA (TAPPI T458 cm-04 2004). Additionally, changes in CA during the time reveal interaction of water-based solutions with paper (Khosravani et al. 2016).

Control (untreated paperboard) samples showed relatively higher CA than the treated samples for which starch/LCNF were applied on the surface. In contrast, the time taken for CA to reach zero degree (absorbed completely by the paperboard) increased following surface application of these materials. Therefore, it can be concluded that although LCNF/starch cannot change the hydrophilic nature of the paperboard surface, they cover the pores and voids on the paperboard surface and increase the water droplet absorption time (more time is needed to reach zero degree).

Cobb test results can confirm the above discussed idea (Fig. 8). Starch is well-known as an inherently hydrophilic material because of the presence of hydroxyl groups; but Fig. 8 shows covering the paperboard surface by applying starch or starch/LCNF mixture reduced the water uptake by the linerboard structure. Because the thin film of starch or starch/LCNF mixture fill in the pores and voids or cover them, less water uptake resulted in the Cobb test, despite the hydrophilic nature of starch.

When an even and continuous film covers the pores and voids on the paperboard surface, it is expected that little water will be allowed to penetrate the paperboard structure. Indeed, lower Cobb values were observed (Fig. 8). Therefore, the reduction of Cobb values due to surface application of starch/ LCNF mixtures can be attributed to the film forming features or filling the pores and voids on paper surface.

Fig. 8. Cobb test results of treated and untreated paper samples

CONCLUSIONS

The field emission scanning electron microscopy (FE-SEM) images showed that high viscosity surface treatment materials, such as sizing mixture containing starch with 50% lignocellulose nanofibers (LCNFs) (CS 4+LCNF 50%), resulted in better paper surface coverage of pores and voids.
The addition of a small amount of LCNFs (5%) to the starch in the sizing material mixture resulted in a significant increase in the tensile index of the paperboard.
The Cobb values and contact angle data indicated that high concentrations of starch can fill the pores and voids on the paperboard sheet, therefore, water droplet needed much more time for penetration and absorption to the paper structure.
The LCNF addition to the cationic starch, can highly increase the viscosity of the sizing liquid mixture. Therefore, because viscosity of the surface treating (sizing/coating) material is an important parameter, the issue needs much more comprehensive investigations. As a promising suggestion, this can be used for adjustment of the viscosity of surface treating material.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The authors would like to thank Afrang Noor Paper Production Company, Nano Novin Polymer, and Kaveh Paper Company for supplying raw materials, chemicals, and supporting this research.

REFERENCES CITED

Amini, E., Hafez, I., Tajvidi, M., and Bousfield, D. (2020). “Cellulose and lignocellulose nanofibril suspensions and films: A comparison,” Carbohydrate Polymers 250, article ID 117011. DOI: 10.1016/j.carbpol.2020.117011

Bardet, R., and Bras, J. (2014). “Cellulose nanofibers and their use in paper industry,” In: Handbook of Green Materials: Processing Technologies, Properties and Applications, K. Oksman, A. P. Mathew, A. Bismarck, O. Rojas, M. Sain (eds.), World Scientific Publishing, Singapore, pp. 207-232. DOI: 10.1142/8975

Biricik, Y., Sonmez, S., and Ozden, O. (2011). “Effects of surface sizing with starch on physical strength properties of paper,” Asian Journal of Chemistry 23(7), 3151-3154.

Brodin, F., Gregersen, O., and Syverud, K. (2014). “Cellulose nanofibrils: Challenges and possibilities as a paper additive or coating material – A review,” Nordic Pulp & Paper Research Journal 29(1), 156-166. DOI: 10.3183/npprj-2014-29-01-p156-166

Cheng, G., Zhou, M., Wei, Y-J., Cheng, F., and Zhou, P. (2017). “Comparison of mechanical reinforcement effects of cellulose nanocrystal; cellulose nanofiber; and microfibrillated cellulose in starch composites,” Polymer Composites 40(51), 365-372. DOI: 10.1002/pc.24685

Cowie, J., Bilek, E. M., Wegner, T., and Shatkin, J. (2014). “Market projections of cellulose nanomaterial-enabled products- Part 2: Volume estimates,” Tappi Journal 13(6), 57-69. DOI: 10.32964/tj13.6.57

Delgado-Aguilar, M., Gonzalez, I., Taress, Q., Pelach, M., Alcala, M., and Mutje, P. (2016). “The key role of lignin in the production of low-cost lignocellulosic nanofibres for papermaking applications,” Industrial Crops and Products 86, 295-300. DOI: 10.1016/j.indcrop.2016.04.010

Ekhtera, M. H., Rezayati Charani, P., Ramezani, O., and Azadfallah, M. (2008). “Effects of poly-aluminum chloride, starch, alum, and rosin on the rosin sizing, strength, and microscopic appearance of paper prepared from old corrugated container (OCC) pulp,” BioResources 3(2), 383-402. DOI: 10.15376/biores.3.2.383-402

Fidan, H., Tozluoglu, A., Tutuş, A., Poyraz, B., Arslan, R., Sertkaya, S., Sozbir, T., and Kıllı, U. (2021). “Application of modified cellulose nanofibrils as coating suspension on recycled paper using size press,” Nordic Pulp & Paper Research Journal 36(3), 523-535. DOI: 10.1515/npprj-2021-0021

Gu, L., Jiang, B., Song, J., Jin, Y., and Xiao, H. (2019). “Effect of lignin on performance of lignocellulose nanofibrils for durable superhydrophobic surface,” Cellulose 26(2), 933-944. DOI: 10.1007/s10570-018-2129-0

Hubbe, M. A., Ferrer, A., Tyagi, P., Yin, Y., Salas, C., Pal, L., and Rojas, O. J. (2017). “Nanocellulose in thin films, coatings, and plies for packaging applications: A review,” BioResources 12(1), 2143-2233. DOI: 10.15376/biores.12.1.2143-2233

Kassem, N. (2009). “Mechanical properties of paper sheets treated with different polymers,” Pigment & Resin Technology 2, 91-95. DOI: 10.1108/03699420910940572

Khosravani, A., Asadollahzadeh, M., Rahmaninia, M., Bahramifar, N., and Azadfallah, M. (2016). “The effect of external and internal application of organosilicone compounds on the hydrophobicity of recycled OCC paper,” BioResources 11(4), 8257-8268. DOI: 10.15376/biores.11.4.8257-8258

Koskela, J., and Hormi, O. (2003). “Improving the printability of paper with long-chain quaternaries,” Appita Journal 56, 296-300.

Kumar, V., Elfving, A., Koivula, H., Bousfield, D., and Toivakka, M. (2016). “Roll-to-roll processed cellulose nanofiber coatings,” Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research 55(12), 3603-3613. DOI: 10.1021/acs.iecr.6b00417

Kunam, P. K., Ramakanth, D., Akhila, K., and Gaikwad, K. K. (2024). “Bio-based materials for barrier coatings on paper packaging,” Biomass Conversion and Biorefinery 14(12), 12637-12652. DOI: 10.1007/s13399-022-03241-2

Lavoine, N., Desloges, I., Dufresne, A., and Bras, J. (2012). “Microfibrillated cellulose: Its barrier properties and applications in cellulosic materials: A review,” Carbohydrate Polymers 90, 735-764. DOI: 10.1016/j.carbpol.2012.05.026

Lertsutthiwong, P., Nazhad, M., Chandrkrachang, S., and Stevens, W. (2004). “Chitosan as a surface sizing agent for offset printing paper,” Appita Journal 57, 274-280.

Li, F., Mascheroni, E., and Piergiovanni, L. (2015). “The potential of nanocellulose in the packaging field: A review,” Packaging Technology and Science 28(6), 475-508. DOI: 10.1002/pts.2121

Maurer, H. (2009). “Starch in the paper Industry,” in Starch, Third Edition, J. BeMiller, and R. Whistler (eds.), Academic Press, San Diego, CA, USA, pp. 657-713. DOI: 10.1016/b978-0-12-746275-2.00018-5

Mesic, B., Jarnstrom, L., Hjarthag, C., and Lestelius, M. (2004). “Effects of application temperature in paper surface sizing with temperature-responsive starch on water repellency and flexographic printability,” Apitta Journal 57(4), 281-285.

Moutinho, I., Kleen, A., Figueiredo, M., and Ferreira, P. (2009). “Effect of surface sizing on the surface chemistry of paper containing eucalyptus pulp,” Holzforschung 63(3), 282-289. DOI: 10.1515/hf.2009.046

Olsson, R., Fogelstrom, L., Martinez-Sanz, M., and Henriksson, M. (2011). “Cellulose nanofillers for food packaging,” in: Multifunctional and Nanoreinforced Polymers for Food Packaging, J. M. Lagaron (ed.), Woodhead Publishing, Sawston, UK, pp. 86-107. DOI: 10.1533/9780857092786.1.86

Paunonen, S. (2013). “Strength and barrier enhancements of composites and packaging boards by nanocelluloses – A literature review,” Nordic Pulp & Paper Research Journal 28(2), 165-181. DOI: 10.3183/npprj-2013-28-02-p165-181

SCAN-P 29:95, “Bending resistance,” SCAN-test standards (1995). Stockholm, Sweden.

Sharma, M., Aguado, R., Murtinho, D., Valente, A., Mendes De Sousa, A., and Ferreira, P. (2020). “A review on cationic starch and nanocellulose as paper coating components,” International Journal of Biological Macromolecules 162, 578- 598. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2020.06.131

Shatkin, J., Wegner, T., Bilek, E., and Cowie, J. (2014). “Market projections of cellulose nanomaterial-enabled products – Part 1: Applications,” Tappi Journal 13(5), 9-16. DOI: 10.32964/tj13.5.9

Shen, J., Song, Z., Qian, X., and Ni, Y. (2011). “A review on use of fillers in cellulosic paper for functional applications,” Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research 50, 661-666. DOI: 10.1021/ie1021078

Solala, L., Iglesias, M. C., and Peresin, M. S. (2020). “On the potential of lignin-containing cellulose nanofibrils (LCNFs): a review on properties and applications,” Cellulose 27, 1853-1877. DOI: 10.1007/s10570-019-02899-8

TAPPI T205 om-02 (2002). “Forming handsheets for physical tests of pulp,” TAPPI Press, Atlanta, GA, USA.

TAPPI T414 om-04 (2004). “Internal tearing resistance of paper (Elmendorf-type method),” TAPPI Press, Atlanta, GA, USA.

TAPPI T441 om-04 (2004). “Water absorptiveness of sized (non-bibulous) paper, paperboard, and corrugated fiberboard (Cobb test),” TAPPI Press, Atlanta, GA, USA.

TAPPI T458 cm-04 (2004). “Surface wettability of paper (angle of contact method),” TAPPI Press, Atlanta, GA, USA.

TAPPI T494 om-01 (2001). “Tensile properties of paper and paperboard (using constant rate of elongation apparatus),” TAPPI Press, Atlanta, GA, USA.

TAPPI T818 cm-97 (1997). “Ring crush of paperboard,” TAPPI Press, Atlanta, GA, USA.

Taipale, T., Osterberg, M., Nykanen, A., Ruokolainen, J., and Lain, J. (2010). “Effect of microfibrillated cellulose and fines on the drainage of kraft pulp suspension and paper strength,” Cellulose 17(5), 1005-1020. DOI: 10.1007/s10570-010-9431-9

Tayeb, A., Tajvidi, M., and Bousfield, D. (2020). “Paper-based oil barrier packaging using lignin-containing cellulose nanofibrils,” Molecules 25(6), 1-15. DOI: 10.3390/molecules25061344

Tozluoglu, A., and Fidan, H. (2023). “Effect of size press coating of cationic starch/Nanofibrillated cellulose on physical and mechanical properties of recycled papersheets,” BioResources 18(3), 5993-6012. DOI: 10.15376/biores.18.3.5993-6012

Tutus, A., Gultekin, S., and Cicekler, M. (2017). “Effects of different starch applications on the properties of test liner paper,” in: Proceedings of International Symposium on New Horizons in Forestry, Isparta, Turkey, 318-321.

Vaezi, V., Asadpour, G., and Sharifi, H. (2019). “Effect of coating with novel bio nanocomposites of cationic starch/cellulose nanocrystals on the fundamental properties of the packaging paper,” Polymer Testing 80, article ID 106080. DOI: 10.1016/j.polymertesting.2019.106080

Yang, Sh., Tang, Y., Wang, J., Kong, F., and Zhang, J. (2014). “Surface treatment of cellulosic paper with starch-based composites reinforced with nanocrystalline cellulose,” Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research 53(36), 13980-13988. DOI: 10.1021/ie502125s

Yousefhashemi, S. M., Khosravani, A., and Yousefi, H. (2019). “Isolation of lignocellulose nanofiber from recycled old corrugated container and its interaction with cationic starch–nanosilica combination to make paperboard,” Cellulose 26, 7207-7221. DOI: 10.1007/s10570-019-02562-2

Article submitted: June 18, 2024; Peer review completed: July 31, 2024; Revised version received and accepted: August 21, 2024; Published: September 12, 2024.

DOI: 10.15376/biores.19.4.8188-8201