Recent Advances in Food Emulsions and Engineering Foodstuffs Using Plant-Based Nanocelluloses

Literature Cited

1. Aaen R, Simon S, Brodin FW, Syverud K 2019. The potential of TEMPO-oxidized cellulose nanofibrils as rheology modifiers in food systems. Cellulose 26:5483–96
   [Google Scholar]
2. Abdollahi M, Alboofetileh M, Behrooz R, Rezaei M, Miraki R 2013. Reducing water sensitivity of alginate bio-nanocomposite film using cellulose nanoparticles. Int. J. Biol. Macromol. 54:166–73
   [Google Scholar]
3. Adel AM, Ibrahim AA, El-Shafei AM, Al-Shemy MT 2019. Inclusion complex of clove oil with chitosan/β-cyclodextrin citrate/oxidized nanocellulose biocomposite for active food packaging. Food Packag. Shelf Life 20:100307
   [Google Scholar]
4. Agarwal UP, Ralph SA, Reiner RS, Baez C 2016. Probing crystallinity of never-dried wood cellulose with Raman spectroscopy. Cellulose 23:125–44
   [Google Scholar]
5. Albanese A, Tang PS, Chan WC 2012. The effect of nanoparticle size, shape, and surface chemistry on biological systems. Annu. Rev. Biomed. Eng. 14:1–16
   [Google Scholar]
6. Araki J, Wada M, Kuga S 2001. Steric stabilization of a cellulose microcrystal suspension by poly (ethylene glycol) grafting. Langmuir 17:121–27
   [Google Scholar]
7. Azeredo HM, Mattoso LHC, Wood D, Williams TG, Avena-Bustillos RJ, McHugh TH 2009. Nanocomposite edible films from mango puree reinforced with cellulose nanofibers. J. Food Sci. 74:N31–35
   [Google Scholar]
8. Azeredo HM, Miranda KW, Rosa MF, Nascimento DM, de Moura MR 2012. Edible films from alginate-acerola puree reinforced with cellulose whiskers. LWT Food Sci. Technol. 46:294–97
   [Google Scholar]
9. Azeredo HM, Rosa MF, Mattoso LHC 2017. Nanocellulose in bio-based food packaging applications. Ind. Crops Prod. 97:664–71
   [Google Scholar]
10. Bai L, Greca LG, Xiang W, Lehtonen J, Huan S et al. 2019a. Adsorption and assembly of cellulosic and lignin colloids at oil/water interfaces. Langmuir 35:3571–88
    [Google Scholar]
11. Bai L, Huan S, Gu J, McClements DJ 2016. Fabrication of oil-in-water nanoemulsions by dual-channel microfluidization using natural emulsifiers: saponins, phospholipids, proteins, and polysaccharides. Food Hydrocoll 61:703–11
    [Google Scholar]
12. Bai L, Huan S, Li Z, McClements DJ 2017. Comparison of emulsifying properties of food-grade polysaccharides in oil-in-water emulsions: gum arabic, beet pectin, and corn fiber gum. Food Hydrocoll 66:144–53
    [Google Scholar]
13. Bai L, Huan S, Xiang W, Liu L, Yang Y et al. 2019b. Self-assembled networks of short and long chitin nanoparticles for oil/water interfacial superstabilization. ACS Sustain. Chem. Eng. 7:76497–511
    [Google Scholar]
14. Bai L, Huan S, Xiang W, Rojas OJ 2018a. Pickering emulsions by combining cellulose nanofibrils and nanocrystals: phase behavior and depletion stabilization. Green Chem 20:1571–82
    [Google Scholar]
15. Bai L, Lv S, Xiang W, Huan S, McClements DJ, Rojas OJ 2019c. Oil-in-water Pickering emulsions via microfluidization with cellulose nanocrystals: 1. Formation and stability. Food Hydrocoll 96:699–708
    [Google Scholar]
16. Bai L, Lv S, Xiang W, Huan S, McClements DJ, Rojas OJ 2019d. Oil-in-water Pickering emulsions via microfluidization with cellulose nanocrystals: 2. In vitro lipid digestion. Food Hydrocoll 96:709–16
    [Google Scholar]
17. Bai L, Xiang W, Huan S, Rojas OJ 2018b. Formulation and stabilization of concentrated edible oil-in-water emulsions based on electrostatic complexes of a food-grade cationic surfactant (ethyl lauroyl arginate) and cellulose nanocrystals. Biomacromolecules 19:1674–85
    [Google Scholar]
18. Ben Ayed E, Cochereau R, Dechancé C, Capron I, Nicolai T, Benyahia L 2018. Water-in-water emulsion gels stabilized by cellulose nanocrystals. Langmuir 34:236887–93
    [Google Scholar]
19. Berton-Carabin CC, Schroën K. 2015. Pickering emulsions for food applications: background, trends, and challenges. Annu. Rev. Food Sci. Technol. 6:263–97
    [Google Scholar]
20. Bhattacharya K, Kiliç G, Costa PM, Fadeel B 2017. Cytotoxicity screening and cytokine profiling of nineteen nanomaterials enables hazard ranking and grouping based on inflammogenic potential. Nanotoxicology 11:809–26
    [Google Scholar]
21. Bideau B, Bras J, Adoui N, Loranger E, Daneault C 2017. Polypyrrole/nanocellulose composite for food preservation: barrier and antioxidant characterization. Food Packag. Shelf Life 12:1–8
    [Google Scholar]
22. Binks BP. 2002. Particles as surfactants: similarities and differences. Curr. Opin. Colloid Interface Sci. 7:21–41
    [Google Scholar]
23. Brown RM Jr 2004. Cellulose structure and biosynthesis: What is in store for the 21st century. ? J. Polym. Sci. A 42:487–95
    [Google Scholar]
24. Camarero Espinosa S, Kuhnt T, Foster EJ, Weder C 2013. Isolation of thermally stable cellulose nanocrystals by phosphoric acid hydrolysis. Biomacromolecules 14:1223–30
    [Google Scholar]
25. Cao L, Ge T, Meng F, Xu S, Li J, Wang L 2020. An edible oil packaging film with improved barrier properties and heat sealability from cassia gum incorporating carboxylated cellulose nano crystal whisker. Food Hydrocoll 98:105251
    [Google Scholar]
26. Capron I, Cathala B. 2013. Surfactant-free high internal phase emulsions stabilized by cellulose nanocrystals. Biomacromolecules 14:291–96
    [Google Scholar]
27. Catalán J, Norppa H. 2017. Safety aspects of bio-based nanomaterials. Bioengineering 4:94
    [Google Scholar]
28. Catalán J, Rydman E, Aimonen K, Hannukainen K-S, Suhonen S et al. 2017. Genotoxic and inflammatory effects of nanofibrillated cellulose in murine lungs. Mutagenesis 32:23–31
    [Google Scholar]
29. Chen L, Zhu J, Baez C, Kitin P, Elder T 2016. Highly thermal-stable and functional cellulose nanocrystals and nanofibrils produced using fully recyclable organic acids. Green Chem 18:3835–43
    [Google Scholar]
30. Chen Y, Liu C, Chang PR, Cao X, Anderson DP 2009. Bionanocomposites based on pea starch and cellulose nanowhiskers hydrolyzed from pea hull fibre: effect of hydrolysis time. Carbohydr. Polym. 76:607–15
    [Google Scholar]
31. Čolić M, Mihajlović D, Mathew A, Naseri N, Kokol V 2015. Cytocompatibility and immunomodulatory properties of wood based nanofibrillated cellulose. Cellulose 22:763–78
    [Google Scholar]
32. de Azeredo HM. 2013. Antimicrobial nanostructures in food packaging. Trends Food Sci. Technol. 30:56–69
    [Google Scholar]
33. de Souza HJB, de Barros Fernandes RV, Borges SV, Felix PHC, Viana LC et al. 2018. Utility of blended polymeric formulations containing cellulose nanofibrils for encapsulation and controlled release of sweet orange essential oil. Food Bioprocess Technol 11:1188–98
    [Google Scholar]
34. Dehnad D, Mirzaei H, Emam-Djomeh Z, Jafari S-M, Dadashi S 2014. Thermal and antimicrobial properties of chitosan–nanocellulose films for extending shelf life of ground meat. Carbohydr. Polym. 109:148–54
    [Google Scholar]
35. DeLoid GM, Cao X, Molina RM, Silva DI, Bhattacharya K et al. 2019. Toxicological effects of ingested nanocellulose in in vitro intestinal epithelium and in vivo rat models. Environ. Sci. Nano 6:2105–15
    [Google Scholar]
36. DeLoid GM, Sohal IS, Lorente LR, Molina RM, Pyrgiotakis G et al. 2018. Reducing intestinal digestion and absorption of fat using a nature-derived biopolymer: interference of triglyceride hydrolysis by nanocellulose. ACS Nano 12:6469–79
    [Google Scholar]
37. Deng Z, Jung J, Simonsen J, Zhao Y 2018. Cellulose nanocrystals Pickering emulsion incorporated chitosan coatings for improving storability of postharvest Bartlett pears (Pyrus communis) during long-term cold storage. Food Hydrocoll 84:229–37
    [Google Scholar]
38. Dhar P, Bhardwaj U, Kumar A, Katiyar V 2015. Poly (3‐hydroxybutyrate)/cellulose nanocrystal films for food packaging applications: barrier and migration studies. Polym. Eng. Sci. 55:2388–95
    [Google Scholar]
39. Dinsmore A, Hsu MF, Nikolaides M, Marquez M, Bausch A, Weitz D 2002. Colloidosomes: selectively permeable capsules composed of colloidal particles. Science 298:1006–9
    [Google Scholar]
40. Dong S, Hirani AA, Colacino KR, Lee YW, Roman M 2012. Cytotoxicity and cellular uptake of cellulose nanocrystals. Nano Life 2:1241006
    [Google Scholar]
41. Dri FL, Hector LG, Moon RJ, Zavattieri PD 2013. Anisotropy of the elastic properties of crystalline cellulose I β from first principles density functional theory with Van der Waals interactions. Cellulose 20:2703–18
    [Google Scholar]
42. Du Le H, Loveday SM, Singh H, Sarkar A 2020a. Gastrointestinal digestion of Pickering emulsions stabilised by hydrophobically modified cellulose nanocrystals: release of short-chain fatty acids. Food Chem 320:126650
    [Google Scholar]
43. Du Le H, Loveday SM, Singh H, Sarkar A 2020b. Pickering emulsions stabilised by hydrophobically modified cellulose nanocrystals: responsiveness to pH and ionic strength. Food Hydrocoll 99:105344
    [Google Scholar]
44. Eyebe GFVA, Bideau B, Loranger É, Domingue F 2019. TEMPO-oxidized cellulose nanofibre (TOCN) films and composites with PVOH as sensitive dielectrics for microwave humidity sensing. Sens. Actuators B 291:385–93
    [Google Scholar]
45. Ferrer A, Pal L, Hubbe M 2017. Nanocellulose in packaging: advances in barrier layer technologies. Ind. Crops Prod. 95:574–82
    [Google Scholar]
46. Fontenot KR, Edwards JV, Haldane D, Graves E, Citron MS et al. 2016. Human neutrophil elastase detection with fluorescent peptide sensors conjugated to cellulosic and nanocellulosic materials: part II, structure/function analysis. Cellulose 23:1297–309
    [Google Scholar]
47. French AD. 2017. Glucose, not cellobiose, is the repeating unit of cellulose and why that is important. Cellulose 24:4605–9
    [Google Scholar]
48. Gibis M, Schuh V, Weiss J 2015. Effects of carboxymethyl cellulose (CMC) and microcrystalline cellulose (MCC) as fat replacers on the microstructure and sensory characteristics of fried beef patties. Food Hydrocoll 45:236–46
    [Google Scholar]
49. Giles EL, Kuznesof S, Clark B, Hubbard C, Frewer LJ 2015. Consumer acceptance of and willingness to pay for food nanotechnology: a systematic review. J. Nanopart. Res. 17:467
    [Google Scholar]
50. Golchoobi L, Alimi M, Shokoohi S, Yousefi H 2016. Interaction between nanofibrillated cellulose with guar gum and carboxy methyl cellulose in low-fat mayonnaise. J. Texture Stud. 47:403–12
    [Google Scholar]
51. Guo J, Du W, Gao Y, Cao Y, Yin Y 2017. Cellulose nanocrystals as water-in-oil Pickering emulsifiers via intercalative modification. Colloids Surf. A 529:634–42
    [Google Scholar]
52. Habibi Y, Lucia LA, Rojas OJ 2010. Cellulose nanocrystals: chemistry, self-assembly, and applications. Chem. Rev. 110:3479–500
    [Google Scholar]
53. Harper BJ, Clendaniel A, Sinche F, Way D, Hughes M et al. 2016. Impacts of chemical modification on the toxicity of diverse nanocellulose materials to developing zebrafish. Cellulose 23:1763–75
    [Google Scholar]
54. Helanto KE, Matikainen L, Talja R, Rojas OJ 2019. Bio-based polymers for sustainable packaging and biobarriers: a critical review. BioResources 14:4902–51
    [Google Scholar]
55. Hieta K, Kuga S, Usuda M 1984. Electron staining of reducing ends evidences a parallel-chain structure in Valonia cellulose. Biopolymers 23:1807–10
    [Google Scholar]
56. Hu Z, Marway HS, Kasem H, Pelton R, Cranston ED 2016. Dried and redispersible cellulose nanocrystal Pickering emulsions. ACS Macro Lett 5:185–89
    [Google Scholar]
57. Huan S, Liu G, Cheng W, Han G, Bai L 2018. Electrospun poly(lactic acid)-based fibrous nanocomposite reinforced by cellulose nanocrystals: impact of fiber uniaxial alignment on microstructure and mechanical properties. Biomacromolecules 19:1037–46
    [Google Scholar]
58. Kalashnikova I, Bizot H, Bertoncini P, Cathala B, Capron I 2013. Cellulosic nanorods of various aspect ratios for oil in water Pickering emulsions. Soft Matter 9:952–59
    [Google Scholar]
59. Kalashnikova I, Bizot H, Cathala B, Capron I 2011. New Pickering emulsions stabilized by bacterial cellulose nanocrystals. Langmuir 27:127471–79
    [Google Scholar]
60. Kalashnikova I, Bizot H, Cathala B, Capron I 2012. Modulation of cellulose nanocrystals amphiphilic properties to stabilize oil/water interface. Biomacromolecules 13:267–75
    [Google Scholar]
61. Kasiri N, Fathi M. 2018. Production of cellulose nanocrystals from pistachio shells and their application for stabilizing Pickering emulsions. Int. J. Biol. Macromol. 106:1023–31
    [Google Scholar]
62. Khakalo A, Filpponen I, Rojas OJ 2017. Protein adsorption tailors the surface energies and compatibility between polylactide and cellulose nanofibrils. Biomacromolecules 18:1426–33
    [Google Scholar]
63. Khakalo A, Filpponen I, Rojas OJ 2018. Protein-mediated interfacial adhesion in composites of cellulose nanofibrils and polylactide: enhanced toughness towards material development. Compos. Sci. Technol. 160:145–51
    [Google Scholar]
64. Khan A, Huq T, Khan RA, Riedl B, Lacroix M 2014. Nanocellulose-based composites and bioactive agents for food packaging. Crit. Rev. Food Sci. Nutr. 54:163–74
    [Google Scholar]
65. Khan A, Khan RA, Salmieri S, Le Tien C, Riedl B et al. 2012. Mechanical and barrier properties of nanocrystalline cellulose reinforced chitosan based nanocomposite films. Carbohydr. Polym. 90:1601–8
    [Google Scholar]
66. Khare S, DeLoid GM, Molina RM, Gokulan K, Couvillion SP et al. 2020. Effects of ingested nanocellulose on intestinal microbiota and homeostasis in Wistar Han rats. NanoImpact 18:100216
    [Google Scholar]
67. Klemm D, Heublein B, Fink HP, Bohn A 2005. Cellulose: fascinating biopolymer and sustainable raw material. Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 44:3358–93
    [Google Scholar]
68. Klemm D, Kramer F, Moritz S, Lindström T, Ankerfors M et al. 2011. Nanocelluloses: a new family of nature‐based materials. Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 50:5438–66
    [Google Scholar]
69. Klockars KW, Tardy BL, Borghei M, Tripathi A, Greca LG, Rojas OJ 2018. Effect of anisotropy of cellulose nanocrystal suspensions on stratification, domain structure formation, and structural colors. Biomacromolecules 19:2931–43
    [Google Scholar]
70. Kontturi E, Laaksonen P, Linder MB, Gröschel AH, Rojas OJ, Ikkala O 2018. Advanced materials through assembly of nanocelluloses. Adv. Mater. 30:1703779
    [Google Scholar]
71. Kontturi E, Meriluoto A, Penttilä PA, Baccile N, Malho JM et al. 2016. Degradation and crystallization of cellulose in hydrogen chloride vapor for high‐yield isolation of cellulose nanocrystals. Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 55:14455–58
    [Google Scholar]
72. Kriechbaum K, Bergström L. 2020. Antioxidant and UV-blocking leather-inspired nanocellulose-based films with high wet strength. Biomacromolecules 21:51720–28
    [Google Scholar]
73. Levine S, Bowen BD, Partridge SJ 1989. Stabilization of emulsions by fine particles I. Partitioning of particles between continuous phase and oil/water interface. Colloids Surf 38:325–43
    [Google Scholar]
74. Li F, Mascheroni E, Piergiovanni L 2015. The potential of nanocellulose in the packaging field: a review. Packag. Technol. Sci. 28:475–508
    [Google Scholar]
75. Li J, Cha R, Mou K, Zhao X, Long K et al. 2018. Nanocellulose-based antibacterial materials. Adv. Healthc. Mater. 7:20e1800334
    [Google Scholar]
76. Li Q, Gao R, Wang L, Xu M, Yuan Y et al. 2020. Nanocomposites of bacterial cellulose nanofibrils and zein nanoparticles for food packaging. ACS Appl. Nano Mater. 3:2899–910
    [Google Scholar]
77. Li Q, Wang Y, Wu Y, He K, Li Y et al. 2019a. Flexible cellulose nanofibrils as novel Pickering stabilizers: the emulsifying property and packing behavior. Food Hydrocoll 88:180–89
    [Google Scholar]
78. Li Q, Xie B, Wang Y, Wang Y, Peng L et al. 2019b. Cellulose nanofibrils from Miscanthus floridulus straw as green particle emulsifier for O/W Pickering emulsion. Food Hydrocoll 97:105214
    [Google Scholar]
79. Li Y, Vasileva E, Sychugov I, Popov S, Berglund L 2018. Optically transparent wood: recent progress, opportunities, and challenges. Adv. Opt. Mater. 6:141800059
    [Google Scholar]
80. Ling S, Chen W, Fan Y, Zheng K, Jin K et al. 2018. Biopolymer nanofibrils: structure, modeling, preparation, and applications. Prog. Polym. Sci. 85:1–56
    [Google Scholar]
81. Liu L, Kerr WL, Kong F 2019. Characterization of lipid emulsions during in vitro digestion in the presence of three types of nanocellulose. J. Colloid Interface Sci. 545:317–29
    [Google Scholar]
82. Mackie A, Gourcy S, Rigby N, Moffat J, Capron I, Bajka B 2019. The fate of cellulose nanocrystal stabilised emulsions after simulated gastrointestinal digestion and exposure to intestinal mucosa. Nanoscale 11:2991–98
    [Google Scholar]
83. Majoinen J, Haataja JS, Appelhans D, Lederer A, Olszewska A et al. 2014. Supracolloidal multivalent interactions and wrapping of dendronized glycopolymers on native cellulose nanocrystals. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 136:866–69
    [Google Scholar]
84. McClements DJ. 2020. Future foods: a manifesto for research priorities in structural design of foods. Food Funct 11:1933–45
    [Google Scholar]
85. McClements DJ, Bai L, Chung C 2017. Recent advances in the utilization of natural emulsifiers to form and stabilize emulsions. Annu. Rev. Food Sci. Technol. 8:205–36
    [Google Scholar]
86. McClements DJ, DeLoid G, Pyrgiotakis G, Shatkin JA, Xiao H, Demokritou P 2016. The role of the food matrix and gastrointestinal tract in the assessment of biological properties of ingested engineered nanomaterials (iENMs): state of the science and knowledge gaps. NanoImpact 3:47–57
    [Google Scholar]
87. Medronho B, Romano A, Miguel MG, Stigsson L, Lindman B 2012. Rationalizing cellulose (in)solubility: reviewing basic physicochemical aspects and role of hydrophobic interactions. Cellulose 19:581–87
    [Google Scholar]
88. Mei L, Wang Q. 2020. Advances in using nanotechnology structuring approaches for improving food packaging. Annu. Rev. Food Sci. Technol. 11:336–64
    [Google Scholar]
89. Menas AL, Yanamala N, Farcas MT, Russo M, Friend S et al. 2017. Fibrillar versus crystalline nanocellulose pulmonary epithelial cell responses: cytotoxicity or inflammation. ? Chemosphere 171:671–80
    [Google Scholar]
90. Mikulcová V, Bordes R, Minařík A, Kašpárková V 2018. Pickering oil-in-water emulsions stabilized by carboxylated cellulose nanocrystals: effect of the pH. Food Hydrocoll 80:60–67
    [Google Scholar]
91. Missio AL, Mattos BD, Ferreira DDF, Magalhães WL, Bertuol DA et al. 2018. Nanocellulose-tannin films: from trees to sustainable active packaging. J. Clean. Prod. 184:143–51
    [Google Scholar]
92. Mohamed SA, El-Sakhawy M, El-Sakhawy M-AM 2020. Polysaccharides, protein and lipid-based natural edible films in food packaging: a review. Carbohydr. Polym. 238:116178
    [Google Scholar]
93. Montoya Ú, Zuluaga R, Castro C, Vélez L, Gañán P 2019. Starch and starch/bacterial nanocellulose films as alternatives for the management of minimally processed mangoes. Starch‐Stärke 71:5–61800120
    [Google Scholar]
94. Moreirinha C, Vilela C, Silva NH, Pinto RR, Almeida A et al. 2020. Antioxidant and antimicrobial films based on brewers spent grain arabinoxylans, nanocellulose and feruloylated compounds for active packaging. Food Hydrocoll 108:105836
    [Google Scholar]
95. Nechyporchuk O, Belgacem MN, Pignon FDR 2016. Current progress in rheology of cellulose nanofibril suspensions. Biomacromolecules 17:2311–20
    [Google Scholar]
96. Okiyama A, Motoki M, Yamanaka S 1993. Bacterial cellulose IV. Application to processed foods. Food Hydrocoll 6:503–11
    [Google Scholar]
97. Ong K, Shatkin J, Nelson K, Ede J, Retsina T 2017. Establishing the safety of novel bio-based cellulose nanomaterials for commercialization. NanoImpact 6:19–29
    [Google Scholar]
98. Osorio M, Castro C, Velásquez-Cock J, Vélez-Acosta L, Cáracamo L et al. 2017. Bacterial cellulose nanoribbons: a new bioengineering additive for biomedical and food applications. Industrial Applications of Renewable Biomass Products SN Goyanes, NV D'Accorso 165–76 New York: Springer
    [Google Scholar]
99. Osorno DMS, Castro C. 2018. Cellulose application in food industry: a review. Emergent Research on Polymeric and Composite Materials R Somashekar, T Urs G. 38–77 Hershey, PA: IGI Global
    [Google Scholar]
100. Pääkkö M, Ankerfors M, Kosonen H, Nykänen A, Ahola S et al. 2007. Enzymatic hydrolysis combined with mechanical shearing and high-pressure homogenization for nanoscale cellulose fibrils and strong gels. Biomacromolecules 8:1934–41
     [Google Scholar]
101. Paralikar SA, Simonsen J, Lombardi J 2008. Poly(vinyl alcohol)/cellulose nanocrystal barrier membranes. J. Membr. Sci. 320:248–58
     [Google Scholar]
102. Patel AR. 2018. Functional and engineered colloids from edible materials for emerging applications in designing the food of the future. Adv. Funct. Mater. 30:181806809
     [Google Scholar]
103. Peddireddy KR, Nicolai T, Benyahia L, Capron I 2016. Stabilization of water-in-water emulsions by nanorods. ACS Macro Lett 5:283–86
     [Google Scholar]
104. Peng X, Yao Y. 2017. Carbohydrates as fat replacers. Annu. Rev. Food Sci. Technol. 8:331–51
     [Google Scholar]
105. Peters RJ, Bouwmeester H, Gottardo S, Amenta V, Arena M et al. 2016. Nanomaterials for products and application in agriculture, feed and food. Trends Food Sci. Technol. 54:155–64
     [Google Scholar]
106. Pickering SU. 1907. CXCVI.—Emulsions. J. Chem. Soc. Trans. 91:2001–21
     [Google Scholar]
107. Quennouz N, Hashmi SM, Choi HS, Kim JW, Osuji CO 2016. Rheology of cellulose nanofibrils in the presence of surfactants. Soft Matter 12:157–64
     [Google Scholar]
108. Ramsden W. 1904. Separation of solids in the surface-layers of solutions and ‘suspensions’ (observations on surface-membranes, bubbles, emulsions, and mechanical coagulation).—preliminary account. Proc. R. Soc. London 72:156–64
     [Google Scholar]
109. Rånby BG. 1951. Fibrous macromolecular systems. Cellulose and muscle. The colloidal properties of cellulose micelles. Discuss. Faraday Soc. 11:158–64
     [Google Scholar]
110. Revol J-F, Bradford H, Giasson J, Marchessault R, Gray D 1992. Helicoidal self-ordering of cellulose microfibrils in aqueous suspension. Int. J. Biol. Macromol. 14:170–72
     [Google Scholar]
111. Robson A. 2012. Tackling obesity: Can food processing be a solution rather than a problem. ? Agro Food Ind. Hi-Tech 23:10–11
     [Google Scholar]
112. Rongpipi S, Ye D, Gomez ED, Gomez EW 2019. Progress and opportunities in the characterization of cellulose: an important regulator of cell wall growth and mechanics. Front. Plant Sci. 9:1894
     [Google Scholar]
113. Saito T, Kimura S, Nishiyama Y, Isogai A 2007. Cellulose nanofibers prepared by TEMPO-mediated oxidation of native cellulose. Biomacromolecules 8:2485–91
     [Google Scholar]
114. Sarkar A, Li H, Cray D, Boxall S 2018. Composite whey protein–cellulose nanocrystals at oil-water interface: towards delaying lipid digestion. Food Hydrocoll 77:436–44
     [Google Scholar]
115. Sarwar MS, Niazi MBK, Jahan Z, Ahmad T, Hussain A 2018. Preparation and characterization of PVA/nanocellulose/Ag nanocomposite films for antimicrobial food packaging. Carbohydr. Polym. 184:453–64
     [Google Scholar]
116. Serpa A, Velásquez-Cock J, Gañán P, Castro C, Vélez L, Zuluaga R 2016. Vegetable nanocellulose in food science: a review. Food Hydrocoll 57:178–86
     [Google Scholar]
117. Sogut E. 2020. Active whey protein isolate films including bergamot oil emulsion stabilized by nanocellulose. Food Packag. Shelf Life 23:100430
     [Google Scholar]
118. Somerville C. 2006. Cellulose synthesis in higher plants. Annu. Rev. Cell Dev. Biol. 22:53–78
     [Google Scholar]
119. Sun L, Chen W, Liu Y, Li J, Yu H 2015. Soy protein isolate/cellulose nanofiber complex gels as fat substitutes: rheological and textural properties and extent of cream imitation. Cellulose 22:2619–27
     [Google Scholar]
120. Svagan AJ, Koch CB, Hedenqvist M, Nilsson F, Glasser G et al. 2016. Liquid-core nanocellulose-shell capsules with tunable oxygen permeability. Carbohydr. Polym. 136:292–99
     [Google Scholar]
121. Tavakolian M, Jafari SM, van de Ven TG 2020. A review on surface-functionalized cellulosic nanostructures as biocompatible antibacterial materials. Nano-Micro Lett 12:73
     [Google Scholar]
122. Ullah H, Santos HA, Khan T 2016. Applications of bacterial cellulose in food, cosmetics and drug delivery. Cellulose 23:2291–314
     [Google Scholar]
123. US Food Drug Admin. (FDA) 2018. FDA's approach to regulation of nanotechnology products. US Food and Drug Administration https://www.fda.gov/science-research/nanotechnology-programs-fda/fdas-approach-regulation-nanotechnology-products
     [Google Scholar]
124. Valencia L, Nomena EM, Mathew AP, Velikov KP 2019. Biobased cellulose nanofibril-oil composite films for active edible barriers. ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 11:16040–47
     [Google Scholar]
125. Vartiainen J, Pöhler T, Sirola K, Pylkkänen L, Alenius H et al. 2011. Health and environmental safety aspects of friction grinding and spray drying of microfibrillated cellulose. Cellulose 18:775–86
     [Google Scholar]
126. Velásquez-Cock J, Serpa A, Vélez L, Gañán P, Hoyos CG et al. 2019. Influence of cellulose nanofibrils on the structural elements of ice cream. Food Hydrocoll 87:204–13
     [Google Scholar]
127. Vilarinho F, Sanches Silva A, Vaz MF, Farinha JP 2018. Nanocellulose in green food packaging. Crit. Rev. Food Sci. Nutr. 58:1526–37
     [Google Scholar]
128. Wågberg L, Decher G, Norgren M, Lindström T, Ankerfors M, Axnäs K 2008. The build-up of polyelectrolyte multilayers of microfibrillated cellulose and cationic polyelectrolytes. Langmuir 24:3784–95
     [Google Scholar]
129. Wang Y, Cao X, Zhang L 2006. Effects of cellulose whiskers on properties of soy protein thermoplastics. Macromol. Biosci. 6:524–31
     [Google Scholar]
130. Watson RR, Preedy VR, Zibadi S 2013. Chocolate in Health and Nutrition Totowa, NJ: Humana Press
131. Wen C, Yuan Q, Liang H, Vriesekoop F 2014. Preparation and stabilization of d-limonene Pickering emulsions by cellulose nanocrystals. Carbohydr. Polym. 112:695–700
     [Google Scholar]
132. Winuprasith T, Khomein P, Mitbumrung W, Suphantharika M, Nitithamyong A, McClements DJ 2018. Encapsulation of vitamin D₃ in Pickering emulsions stabilized by nanofibrillated mangosteen cellulose: impact on in vitro digestion and bioaccessibility. Food Hydrocoll 83:153–64
     [Google Scholar]
133. Winuprasith T, Suphantharika M. 2015. Properties and stability of oil-in-water emulsions stabilized by microfibrillated cellulose from mangosteen rind. Food Hydrocoll 43:690–99
     [Google Scholar]
134. Wu Z, Deng W, Luo J, Deng D 2019. Multifunctional nano-cellulose composite films with grape seed extracts and immobilized silver nanoparticles. Carbohydr. Polym. 205:447–55
     [Google Scholar]
135. Yanamala N, Farcas MT, Hatfield MK, Kisin ER, Kagan VE et al. 2014. In vivo evaluation of the pulmonary toxicity of cellulose nanocrystals: a renewable and sustainable nanomaterial of the future. ACS Sustain. Chem. Eng. 2:1691–98
     [Google Scholar]
136. Zhang H, Qian Y, Chen S, Zhao Y 2019. Physicochemical characteristics and emulsification properties of cellulose nanocrystals stabilized O/W Pickering emulsions with high −OSO₃⁻ groups. Food Hydrocoll 96:267–77
     [Google Scholar]
137. Zhang X, Liu Y, Wang Y, Luo X, Li Y et al. 2019. Surface modification of cellulose nanofibrils with protein nanoparticles for enhancing the stabilization of O/W Pickering emulsions. Food Hydrocoll 97:105180
     [Google Scholar]
138. Zhang X, Wang W, Wang Y, Wang Y, Wang X et al. 2018. Effects of nanofiber cellulose on functional properties of heat-induced chicken salt-soluble meat protein gel enhanced with microbial transglutaminase. Food Hydrocoll 84:1–8
     [Google Scholar]
139. Zhou H, Lv S, Liu J, Tan Y, Mundo J et al. 2019. Modulation of physicochemical characteristics of Pickering emulsions: utilization of nanocellulose- and nanochitin-coated lipid droplet blends. J. Agric. Food Chem. 68:603–11
     [Google Scholar]
140. Zhou W, Cao J, Liu W, Stoyanov S 2009. How rigid rods self-assemble at curved surfaces. Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 48:378–81
     [Google Scholar]