Review

Starch-Derived Bioplastics: Pioneering Sustainable Solutions for

Industrial Use
Mahmoud Omar Sobeih 1 , Shadi Sawalha 2 , Rinad Hamed 3 , Fathilah Ali 1, * and Minsoo P. Kim 4, *

1 Department of Chemical Engineering and Sustainability, Kulliyyah of Engineering, International Islamic

University Malaysia, Kuala Lumpur 53100, Malaysia; mahmoudsobeih30@gmail.com
2 Department of Chemical Engineering, An Najah National University, Nablus P.O. Box 7, Palestinian Territory;
sh.sawalha@najah.edu
3 Department of Chemistry, Faculty of Science, An-Najah National University,
Nablus P.O. Box 7, Palestinian Territory; rinad.hamed@najah.edu
4 Department of Chemical Engineering, Sunchon National University, Suncheon 57922, Republic of Korea
* Correspondence: fathilah@iium.edu.my (F.A.); mspkim@scnu.ac.kr (M.P.K.)

Abstract: The use of plastics has increased due to the increase in population and applica-
tions in various industries. However, fossil fuel-based plastics have caused environmental
issues and health hazards due to their non-degradable behavior. To resolve the on-going
crisis of these non-degradable polymers, biopolymers have been considered as potential
substitutes. Starch is being researched as a polymer matrix to develop bioplastics. Starch
is abundant, but due to its poor water barrier and mechanical properties, other materials
need to be incorporated in the matrix to improve the material properties. Natural fillers,
plasticizers, essential oils, nanoparticles, or polymer blends are materials that can be used
in starch-based bioplastics. Adding these materials enhances the mechanical and barrier
properties. This review summarizes the recent developments in starch-based bioplas-
tics and biocomposites and discusses the types of starch used, fillers, essential oils, and
nanoparticles, explaining how they improve the mechanical, barrier, antibacterial, and
biodegradability properties. Furthermore, many of the research products show potential to
be used in industrial applications like packaging and agriculture. This review also discusses
the potential of starch bioplastics in industrial applications like packaging, automotive ap-
plications, biomedical applications, electronics, construction, textiles, and consumer goods.
This review also discusses the environmental impact of starch-derived bioplastic products,
Academic Editor: Yuanqing Li the life cycle, biodegradation, and recycling process. The circular economy of bioplastics,
Received: 13 March 2025 the economic feasibility of large-scale products, and regulation were also discussed, along
Revised: 4 April 2025 with their challenges and the future perspectives of starch-based bioplastics.
Accepted: 8 April 2025
Published: 11 April 2025 Keywords: starch-based bioplastic; essential oils; natural fillers; nanoparticles; properties;
Citation: Sobeih, M.O.; Sawalha, S.; applications; biodegradability; sustainability
Hamed, R.; Ali, F.; Kim, M.P. Starch-
Derived Bioplastics: Pioneering
Sustainable Solutions for Industrial
Use. Materials 2025, 18, 1762. https://
1. Introduction
doi.org/10.3390/ma18081762
Plastics are used in a wide range of applications, such as domestic, industrial, and
Copyright: © 2025 by the authors.
commercial applications, but as the world’s population continues to increase, the demand
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.
This article is an open access article
for plastic increases. Plastics are inexpensive, light-weight, and durable; thus, global plastic
distributed under the terms and production is expected to reach a projected value of 1.1 billion metric tons by 2050 [1].
conditions of the Creative Commons However, plastic causes pollution, impacting ecosystems due to its durability, which means
Attribution (CC BY) license it decomposes over a long period [2,3]. Research shows that 220 million tons of plastic
(https://creativecommons.org/
was generated, averaging 28 kg per person worldwide, and it is predicted that 420 million
licenses/by/4.0/).

Materials 2025, 18, 1762 https://doi.org/10.3390/ma18081762

 Materials
Materials 2025,
2025, 18,18, x FOR PEER REVIEW
1762 2 of 332 of 32

tons
means will be generatedover
it decomposes in 2040
a long[4].period
Plastic pollution
[2,3]. Research is ashows
global environmental
that 220 million tons challenge
of
plastic
due was generated,
to plastics ending averaging 28 kgand
up in landfills per incineration
person worldwide, plants and it is predicted
or being improperly thatdisposed
420
million
of. Thistons will be generated
widespread use resultsin 2040 [4]. Plastic
in plastics pollution
polluting is a global
terrestrial andenvironmental
aquatic systemschal- and
lenge due
causes the to plastics
spread of ending up in landfills
microplastics, whichand have incineration
health effects plants[5].or Also,
being greenhouse
improperly gas
disposed of.
emissions occurThisatwidespread
every stageuse results
of the plasticin plastics
life cycle,polluting terrestrial
which affect and aquatic sys-
the environment through
tems and causes
phenomena suchthe spread warming
as global of microplastics, which havethese
[6]. To overcome health effects [5].there
challenges, Also,isgreen-
a need to
house gas
produce emissions
plastics from occur at every
natural stage ofsources.
renewable the plastic life cycle, which affect the environ-
ment through phenomena such as global warming [6]. To overcome these challenges,
Bioplastics are derived from renewable biomass such as plants and plant products,
there is a need to produce plastics from natural renewable sources.
which easily break down without harming the environment. They are economically friendly,
Bioplastics are derived from renewable biomass such as plants and plant products,
renewable, and non-toxic due to their botanical sources such as starch, cellulose, proteins,
which easily break down without harming the environment. They are economically
lipids, and more. Also, they reduce non-biodegradable waste and save energy during
friendly, renewable, and non-toxic due to their botanical sources such as starch, cellulose,
production [7]. Bioplastics have the potential to significantly reduce plastic pollution in
proteins, lipids, and more. Also, they reduce non-biodegradable waste and save energy
the environment,
during productionand [7].research
Bioplasticsshows
havethat bioplastics
the potential to can reduce carbon
significantly reducedioxide emissions
plastic pollu-
by 30–70% [8]. The most used and promising bioplastics are
tion in the environment, and research shows that bioplastics can reduce carbon dioxide based on starch due to its
abundance,
emissions bylow cost,[8].
30–70% renewability,
The most used andand sustainability at the industrial
promising bioplastics are based scale. However,
on starch
starch has the disadvantages of a poor water barrier and mechanical
due to its abundance, low cost, renewability, and sustainability at the industrial scale. properties, and to
overcome
However, these
starchissues,
has theadditives
disadvantageslike natural
of a poor fillers,
wateressential
barrier and oils, nanoparticles,
mechanical and poly-
properties,
mer
and blends are added
to overcome these into theadditives
issues, composite likematrix.
naturalThese
fillers,additives reinforce
essential oils, the polymer
nanoparticles,
matrix, enhancing
and polymer blendsmechanical
are added and into thebarrier properties,
composite matrix. and promote
These biodegradability.
additives reinforce the For
polymer
the past 10 matrix,
years,enhancing mechanical
many scientists and barrier have
and researchers properties, and promote
developed starch-basedbiodegrada-
biocompos-
bility. For the past 10 years, many scientists and researchers have developed
ites and enhanced their properties [9–11], as shown in Figure 1. Several review articles have starch-based
biocomposites
discussed and enhanced
different aspects oftheir properties bioplastics,
starch-based [9–11], as shown in Figure
including the 1. Several
works of review
Jayarathna
articles have discussed different aspects of starch-based bioplastics,
et al. [12] and Rahardiyan et al. [13]. This review aims to provide a more focused including the works and
updated analysis of recent advancements in the incorporation of natural fillers,more
of Jayarathna et al. [12] and Rahardiyan et al. [13]. This review aims to provide a essential
focused and updated analysis of recent advancements in the incorporation
oils, nanoparticles, and polymer blends in starch-based bioplastics. It will particularly of natural fill-
ers, essential oils, nanoparticles, and polymer blends in starch-based bioplastics. It will
emphasize their effects on mechanical, barrier, and antibacterial properties, highlighting
particularly emphasize their effects on mechanical, barrier, and antibacterial properties,
their potential for industrial applications. Furthermore, this review explores current in-
highlighting their potential for industrial applications. Furthermore, this review explores
dustrial applications—including packaging, agriculture, textiles, automotive applications,
current industrial applications—including packaging, agriculture, textiles, automotive
consumer goods, and construction—while addressing the environmental and economic
applications, consumer goods, and construction—while addressing the environmental
impacts of bioplastics. Finally, the existing challenges in the field are discussed, and future
and economic impacts of bioplastics. Finally, the existing challenges in the field are dis-
directions
cussed, and for further
future innovation
directions and commercialization
for further are proposed. are proposed.
innovation and commercialization

500

450

400

350
Documents

300

250

200

150

100

50

0
2009 2011 2013 2015 2017 2019 2021 2023 2025
Year

Figure 1. Articles published with the following keywords: starch bioplastics and biocomposites
(source: Scopus).
 Materials 2025, 18, x FOR PEER REVIEW 3 of 33

Materials 2025, 18, 1762 3 of 32

Figure 1. Articles published with the following keywords: starch bioplastics and biocomposites
(source: Scopus).
2. Starch-Based Bioplastics
2. Starch-Based Bioplastics
Starch is a biopolymer consisting of D-glucose subunits connected by glycosidic bonds
Starch is a biopolymer consisting of D-glucose subunits connected by glycosidic
containing varying amounts of amylopectin (80–90%) and amylose (10–20%), where amy-
bonds containing varying amounts of amylopectin (80–90%) and amylose (10–20%),
lose is a linear polysaccharide with α-(1-4)-linked D-glucose units and amylopectin is a
where amylose is a linear polysaccharide with α-(1-4)-linked D-glucose units and amylo-
highly branched molecule with α-(1-6)-linked branches [14]. The higher proportion of
pectin is a highly branched molecule with α-(1-6)-linked branches [14]. The higher pro-
amylopectin increases the crystallinity of starch, whereas amylose provides better tensile
portion of amylopectin increases the crystallinity of starch, whereas amylose provides bet-
strength, a lower elongation at break, and a higher Young’s modulus [15]. From these
ter tensile strength, a lower elongation at break, and a higher Young’s modulus [15]. From
properties, starch starch
these properties, has great
has potential to be used
great potential to betoused
develop bioplastics
to develop due todue
bioplastics its biodegrad-
to its
ability, renewability,
biodegradability, and availability
renewability, in large quantities,
and availability and currently,
in large quantities, 50% of50%
and currently, developed
of
bioplastics
developed bioplastics are starch-based; thus, it is predicted to be the dominant material in
are starch-based; thus, it is predicted to be the dominant material source
the industry
source in the by 2030 [16,17].
industry by 2030Many previous
[16,17]. studies studies
Many previous have produced bioplastics
have produced from natu-
bioplastics
ral
fromstarch sources
natural starchsuch as banana
sources peel [18],
such as banana peelcorn
[18],[19],
cornrice
[19],[20],
rice cassava [21],[21],
[20], cassava tapioca
tap- [22],
sago [23], and potato starch [24]. Over time, many researchers have
ioca [22], sago [23], and potato starch [24]. Over time, many researchers have found inno- found innovative
ways
vativetoways
improve the properties
to improve by adding
the properties natural
by adding fillers,
natural essential
fillers, oils,oils,
essential nanoparticles,
nanoparti- and
cles, andblends
polymer polymer blends
(PLA, (PLA,
BHET, BHET,
and PVA),and PVA),
as is shownas isin shown
Figure in 2. Figure 2. Thisdiscusses
This section section the
discusses the recent work performed in developing
recent work performed in developing starch-based bioplastics. starch-based bioplastics.

Figure 2. Molecular
Figure Molecularstructures
structuresofofstarch and
starch reinforced
and fillers
reinforced andand
fillers polymer blends.
polymer blends.

2.1.
2.1. Natural Fillers
Natural Fillers
Natural fillersare
Natural fillers arebio-based
bio-basedmaterials
materials that
that areare added
added intointo a polymer,
a polymer, which
which improve
improve
the
the mechanical, thermal,and
mechanical, thermal, andbarrier
barrier properties.
properties. Also,
Also, theythey
havehave great
great advantages
advantages of easy
of easy
availability, aa simple
availability, simplemanufacturing
manufacturing process,
process,renewability,
renewability, andand
lessless
energy consumption.
energy consumption.
The most
The most widely
widelyused usednatural
naturalfillers are
fillers natural
are natural fibers from
fibers plants
from because
plants of their
because abun-abun-
of their
dance, availability, and low cost. Plant fibers include kenaf, jute, sugarcane,
dance, availability, and low cost. Plant fibers include kenaf, jute, sugarcane, bagasse, bagasse, oil oil
palm fruit, husk, rice, straw, and more. A higher cellulose content allows for the fabrication
of composites with high strength [25,26]. This section discusses the works performed
regarding different types of natural fillers and enhancement properties, stressing the im-
Materials 2025, 18, 1762 4 of 32

portance of adding them into the polymer matrix. The findings are also summarized in
Table 1.

2.1.1. Plant Fillers

Bioplastics have been studied with a focus on packaging applications. A heat-sealable
bioplastics film was developed from locust bean and potato byproducts. The samples were
prepared from a blend of locust bean milling dust (5% w/v) and starch (2% or 4% w/v)
dispersed in distilled water with glycerol. This work analyzed chromatic, morphological,
and mechanical properties and carried out gas barrier testing. After that, cheese and oat
cookies were packaged and stored at 4 ◦ C. The tensile strength (TS) and elongation at
break (EAB) were 4.3 MPa and 64.5%. The bioplastic prepared from locust bean milling
dust (LBMD) and starch developed transparent and yellow films with higher rigidity,
hydrophobicity, and gas barrier properties. The quality of the cheese was protected for
14 days of storage, but after that, oxidative reactions occurred through odor and flavor.
The oat cookies were preserved longer at 21 days as these bioplastic films prevented the
oxidative rancidity of fatty cookies. This LBMD/starch bioplastic was proven to preserve
fatty foodstuffs [27].
A viable fiber that can be made from the entire plant is kenaf because of its low cost;
it enhances mechanical properties and has diverse applications in many climates. Hazrol
et al. [28] developed a corn starch biocomposite incorporating kenaf fiber at different
concentrations (0, 2, 4, 6, and 8 wt%. of corn starch). The optimal biocomposite was that
with 6 wt% with a high TS of 17.74 MPa and an EAB of 48.79%; it absorbed less water
and decreased the moisture content (5.99%). The incorporation of kenaf fiber enhances
the mechanical properties, improves barrier properties, and can solve the fragility and
brittleness of starch films.
Majamo et al. [29] extracted anchote starch and reinforced enset fiber as it has signifi-
cant chemical and physical qualities that make it a valuable raw material. The bioplastic
film was prepared using 100 mL of distilled water and 5 g of extracted starch with enset
fiber mixed in varying ratios (0%, 4%, 8%, 12%, 16%, and 20% w/w starch), hydrochloric
acid (HCl), and glycerol. The mechanical properties were tested using ASTM D3039 [30],
where 100 mm by 10 mm film specimens were created. The tensile strength increased with
an increased fiber loading until reaching 8% with a maximum tensile strength of 8.34 MPa.
The increase in fiber decreased the elongation at break, where at a 16% fiber loading, the
elongation at break was 16.86%, and the fiber loading helped decrease the moisture content
and water solubility. This work suggests that the bioplastic with 8% fiber loading qualifies
as a packaging material due to its high transparency, flexibility, and stability.
Chaffa el al. [31] used false banana fiber (Ensete ventricosum) to develop a starch-based
bioplastic from rotten potato peels. The bioplastic was developed by mixing potato peel
starch with optimized concentrations of HCl and glycerol and a drying temperature 48 ◦ C
with different concentrations of false banana fiber (2, 4, 6, 8, and 10% w/w of starch). The
optimized concentrations of HCl (3.5 mL) and glycerol (3 mL) and the drying temperature
(48 ◦ C) were achieved using a three-level, three-factor Box–Behnken experimental design
and provided a TS of 6.449 and EAB of 19.87%. As the fiber loading increased, the TS
increased until reaching 6% w/w (8.878 MPa) and then decreased, the EAB decreased (from
19.87% to 16.96%), water absorption decreased (59.94%), and biodegradability showed a
83.92% weight loss. This work showed that adding fibers into the matrix enhances the
mechanical properties and improves the barrier properties; thus, the product can be used
for packaging.
Santana et al. [32] used brown seaweed (Rugulopteryx okamurae), from the bay of
Algeciras, to develop a casava starch-based biocomposite with different ratios of seaweed
Materials 2025, 18, 1762 5 of 32

and cassava starch (100/0, 70/30, 50/50, and 30/70). The TS and EAB increased when
cassava starch increased. The TS increased from 0.3 to 0.8 MPa, and the EAB from 1.98 to
2.52%, and the product showed thermal stability from degradation at 200–300 ◦ C.
Apple pomace is the solid residue obtained after the processing of apples containing
cellulose, lignin, starch, pectin, and small quantities of protein, showing potential as an
additive. Ekielski et al. [33] used design of experiments to develop biocomposites with dif-
ferent weight percentages of apple pomace powder and potato starch and different moisture
percentages. This included 14 samples with different apple pomace (60–100 wt%), potato
starch (0–40 wt%), and moisture (10–14%) contents to determine the bonding strength,
Young’s modulus, and wetting angle. The strongest materials were the biocomposites with
the highest amount of starch with moisture contents of 10% and 14%, and the one with
the 10% moisture content showed better temperature resistance. The results show that
combining apple pomace and potato starch has the potential to produce biodegradable
materials like plates and cups.
Coffee grounds have fertilizing functions, which give them the advantage of being
a filler for biocomposites. They contain high amounts of polysaccharides, sugars, oils,
antioxidants, phenolic compounds, and other high-value compounds like iron and zinc.
Zdanowicz et al. [34] developed corn starch thermoplastic films with choline chloride:urea
(CCU) and betaine:urea (BU) mixtures at a molar ratio of 1:5 with 20 pph of coffee ground
filler. The addition of coffee ground increased the TS for the CCU (1.75 to 3.4 MPa) and
BU (3.3 to 4.4 MPa) samples and decreased the EAB for the CCU (79 to 31%) and BU
(52 to 30%) samples. The coffee grounds increased the moisture content for both CCU
(13.2 to 14.7%) and BU (14.2 to 15.5%) but decreased the swelling degree (CCU: 375 to
240%; BU: 349 to 277%). The biodegradation results showed that all samples degraded
within 70 days; however, the BU sample degraded slower. Using coffee grounds as a filler
enhanced the mechanical properties and improved the barrier properties, showing that
they can be applied as fertilizer carriers in agriculture bioplastics.
A natural filler and reinforcement agent, banana pseudostem, has been used in de-
veloping a cassava starch biocomposite. Dilkushi et al. [35] used cassava starch, glycerol,
poly(vinyl alcohol), and banana pseudostem powder to develop a biocomposite with dif-
ferent compositions of PVA (10, 15, 20, 25, 30, 35, and 40%) and pseudostem powder from
sour plantain and ash plantain (10, 15, 20, 25, 30, 35, and 40%), producing a total of 14 films.
The addition of PVA uniformly improved the texture as compared to samples without PVA.
The optimal composition was the biocomposite with 30% pseudostem powder, resulting
in exceptional mechanical properties (TS of 2.5 MPa and EAB of 11%), physiochemical
properties (water absorption 50%), and thermal stability with an onset temperature of
120 ◦ C, giving it great potential to be used for food packaging.
Aaliya et al. [36] used five plant sources of mucilage to develop a bioplastic. Talipot
starch was mixed with distilled water, glycerol, and 5% (w/v) of each of the following
mucilage solutions: shoeblack leaves, okra, basil seeds, fenugreek seeds, and flax seeds.
A bioplastic film without any mucilage was used as the control sample. The basil seed
biocomposite had the lowest moisture content (7.2%), a low EAB (79%), and the highest
water solubility (19%), water vapor permeability, and tensile strength (8 MPa). The decom-
position temperatures were significantly higher, showing increased thermal stability. The
biocomposite without mucilage completely degraded after the 10th day. The basil seed
biocomposite also had the highest degradation stability and decomposed in 15 days with
an 89% weight loss. In general, all developed mucilage biocomposite films had improved
barrier properties, mechanical strength, and biodegradation stability, which makes them
promising innovative sustainable packaging materials that can enhance the protection of
food products.
Materials 2025, 18, 1762 6 of 32

Gum Arabic is a natural gum derived from acacia trees and can be used as a thickening
agent with its amphiphilic nature and exceptional film-forming properties. Oluba et al. [37]
developed a ginger starch–gum Arabic biocomposite in which 29 mL of gum Arabic
solution (15% w/v) and 1 mL of ginger starch solution (5% w/v), and 28 mL of gum Arabic
solution (15% w/v) plus 2 mL ginger starch solution (5% w/v) with distilled water and
glycerol, were used for physiochemical and mechanical testing and coating applications.
The water solubility decreased by 13% due to a higher starch content than the 1 mL solution.
The biocomposite with a ratio of 28:2 had the highest moisture content (9.5%), thickness
(0.25 mm), TS (15.3 MPa), and EAB (38.6%) and was thermally stable. Four coating solutions
were prepared with distilled water (control), gum Arabic solution, ginger starch solution,
gum Arabic–ginger starch composite at a ratio of 29:1, and gum Arabic–ginger starch
composite at a ratio of 28:2 to coat tomatoes to analyze the quality and shelf life of the
tomatoes for 20 days. Using gum Arabic–ginger starch biocomposites as a coating for
tomatoes led to a 10.3% reduction in weight loss, demonstrating the potential of the
biocomposite as a sustainable packaging material for the post-harvest storage of tomatoes.
Another natural filler is olive pit powder (OPP) composed of cellulose (20.9%), hemi-
cellulose (26%), and lignin (35.6%), which are major solid wastes from olive oil extraction.
Lounis et al. [38] developed a bioplastic with corn starch, glycerol, acetic acid, and different
concentrations of OPP (0, 10, 20, 30, 50, and 70% w/w starch), as well as two other films
with antibacterial agents such as zinc oxide (ZO) and oregano essential oil with a 20% OPP
concentration. There was an increase in the moisture content from 9.2% to 14.7% when OPP
was added, and it decreased to 11.56% with a higher OPP concentration, and there was a
decrease in the swelling degree index from 121.9 to 79.1%, though improved water barrier
abilities were seen. Mechanical testing was not performed in this work, but biodegradabil-
ity was observed in 14 days. The 70% OPP concentration had the highest weight loss of 91%.
In terms of antibacterial assay, the film with oregano essential oil–OPP 20% had the highest
antibacterial effects against S. aureus (35 mm), E. coli (32 mm), and Salmonella (30 mm), and
ZnO-OPP 20% also had antibacterial effects against S. aureus (19 mm), E. coli (18 mm), and
Salmonella (18 mm), just like the control film with OPP 20%. Biodegradable packaging
material made from corn starch and OPP can be a great alternative as it enhances water
resistance and antimicrobial properties.
Torres-Vargas et al. [39] developed a corn starch-based biocomposite with different
concentrations of natural filler cellulose nanocrystals from corn husk (CCNC) (2, 4, 6, and
8% w/w) and tested it through packaging preservation with cherry tomatoes. The addition
of CCNC increased the TS by 5.67 MPa and decreased the EAB by 44% due to the formation
of a rigid straight chain gel matrix through a strong intermolecular interaction between
the polymers. Regarding the cherry tomatoes, weight loss was calculated for a storage
period of 9 days. After nine days, the cherry tomatoes lost moisture with surface mold from
biocomposites with 2 and 4 wt%., and the 6 and 8 wt%. biocomposites kept the tomatoes in
good condition due to its good vapor permeability. CCNCs are promising reinforcement
materials due to their high mechanical properties and thermal stability, and they showed
potential to extend the shelf life of cherry tomatoes.
Charles et al. [40] recently developed a biocomposite using arrowroot starch and
sodium alginate with coconut jelly powder as a filler (1, 2, and 3% v/v) to test mechanical
and physiochemical properties and then coated the solution over cherry tomatoes to test
weight loss. The addition of coconut jelly powder increased the TS from 1.84 to 9.35 MPa
and decreased the EAB from 91.33 to 32.8%. Regarding the physicochemical properties, the
moisture content (33.44 to 18.92%) and water solubility (36.79 to 25.46%) decreased due to
the hydrophilic nature of arrowroot starch. The addition of coconut jelly powder improved
the quality of the cherry tomatoes with a weight loss of 8.19%. All the films exhibited soil
Materials 2025, 18, 1762 7 of 32

biodegradation in less than 28 days, and using coconut jelly powder as a filler enhanced the
mechanical and thermal properties, showing that it has potential to be used as packaging
material to promote a longer shelf life.
Aloe vera gel contains polysaccharides, which promote antibacterial activity and me-
chanical properties. Guno et al. [41] used the Box–Behnken Response Surface Methodology
to develop and optimize biocomposites films with three independent variables, namely taro
starch (25 to 35%), glycerol (0 to 2%), and Aloe vera gel (30 to 150%), and response variables
such as the water vapor transmission rate, tensile strength, and thickness. The optimal
values of the biocomposite film were 5.56% taro starch, 25% glycerol, and 49.25% Aloe
vera gel, giving the lowest water vapor transmission rate (0.00163 g/m2 t), the highest TS
(3.26 MPa), and a thickness of 0.14 mm. The outcome of this work showed the ability of the
taro starch biocomposite film’s potential for usage as a sustainable and environmentally
friendly packaging material.
Another recent filler that brought interest was the use of spider web due to its fracture
toughness and high elongation at break and tensile strength. Kedir et al. [42] developed a
biocomposite with spider web and Rosmarinus officinalis essential oil (ROEO). The films
were prepared with chitosan only, potato starch/chitosan, chitosan/potato starch/spider
web (0.75 w/w of chitosan starch) and chitosan/potato starch/spider web/ROEO (1, 5,
and 10%) and then characterized. After testing, tomatoes were dipped in the coating
solutions of the biocomposites and then dried and stored at room temperature to calculate
weight loss. The spider web reinforcement enhanced the mechanical properties, namely
the TS (27.5 MPa) and EAB (22.2%), and the addition of ROEO increased the TS (30.9 MPa)
and EAB (19%). These fillers lowered the moisture content (46.9 to 35.91%) and water
solubility (69.09 to 40.21%) when compared to the films without the fillers. In terms of
antimicrobial properties, the ROEO increased the antimicrobial activity against S. aureus,
and the minimum weight loss in tomatoes was recorded with the ROEO film (6.8%). This
modified biocomposite was proven to have the potential to be used in bioactive food
packaging applications due to the reduction in microbial growth and biodegradation after
60 days, showing that it can improve shelf life in coating and packaging.

2.1.2. Natural Mineral Fillers

Clay minerals are another type of natural fillers, and they have been used in developing
bioplastics. These include halloysite nanotube (HNT), zeolite, hectorite, montmorillonite
(MMT), and bentonite, and they have the potential to improve properties and characteristics
like uniform dispersion and aspect ratio.
Bentonite comprises montmorillonite belonging to the 2:1 phyllosilicates group of clay,
which has been used as a filler in the polymer matrix. Behera et al. [43] developed a bioplas-
tic with yam starch, glycerol, and different proportions of bentonite (0.5, 1, and 1.5% w/w).
It was observed that the TS increased as the concentration of bentonite increased, with an
optimal TS (4.063 MPa) at 1.5% w/w. Also, the 1.5% bentonite bioplastic had low water
absorption and exhibited the highest soil degradation rate (55 days). The bentonite en-
hanced the mechanical and physiochemical properties and can be proposed for usage in
packaging applications.
Montmorillonite (MMT) is a naturally occurring layered aluminosilicate mineral with
a 2:1 clay structure (two tetrahedral sheets sandwiching one octahedral sheet). Singh
et al. [44] developed a corn starch biocomposite with glycerol, MMT nanoclay (1.5% v/v and
2.5% v/v), and 2% v/v of lemongrass oil-based nanoemulsions (LNE). The incorporation
of MMT enhanced the mechanical properties and improved barrier properties. The TS
increased from 17.38 to 26.2 MPa, and the EAB decreased from 16.67 to 13.09% due to
the interactions between the hydrogen bonds and hydroxyl groups creating an excellent
Materials 2025, 18, 1762 8 of 32

crossing point for providing a uniform distribution of stress and load transfer distribution.
Regarding barrier properties, the moisture content and water absorption decreased with
the addition of MMT from 14.92 to 14.09% and from 50.11 to 36.45%. These biocomposite
materials have promising potential to be used for food packaging to extend the shelf lives
of food products.
Another nanoclay that has been used is halloysite nanotube, which has a large as-
pect ratio, is easily available, and has high functionality, good compatibility, and high
mechanical strength. This nanofiller is a multiwall kaolinite nanotube with 1:1 clay lay-
ers with lengths typically ranging from 300 nm to 1500 nm. Ren et al. [45] developed a
potato starch biocomposite with different types of plasticizers (glycerol and sorbitol) and
a halloysite nanotube (3, 5 and 7 wt%). The addition of a halloysite nanotube enhanced
the mechanical properties, where the TS increased (glycerol: 2.28 to 3.36 MPa; sorbitol:
9.7 to 10.78 MPa), and the EAB increased with glycerol (26.1 to 34.5%) and decreased with
sorbitol (43.3 to 35%). The halloysite showed good dispersion with glycerol due to higher
hydrophilic character, and the moisture content decreased with the addition of halloysite
(glycerol: 16.7 to 13.8%; sorbitol: 9.6 to 7.5%). The halloysite nanoclay is an effective and
promising clay to enhance mechanical properties and can be used as an alternative for
replacing non-biodegradable materials in different fields, such as packaging, agriculture,
and biomedical applications.
The incorporation of natural fillers consistently enhances the mechanical and barrier
properties of bioplastics. From the multiple studies performed, improvements in the tensile
strength and water resistance were observed, primarily due to the enhanced interfacial
adhesion and the reinforcing effect of filler particles. In terms of barrier properties, the
water absorption decreased, and suitable moisture contents made these bioplastics suitable
fir packaging, agriculture, and medical applications. Lastly, the natural fillers increased
the crystallinity, making the product thermally stable. Natural fillers are recommended to
improve starch bioplastic properties.

Table 1. Starch-based bioplastics/biocomposites with different natural fillers.

Starch Fillers Properties Ref.

Pineapple Leaf Microfiber TS increased (48 to 51 MPa)
Corn [46]
(3, 6, and 9%) Biodegradation after 28 days showed 82% weight loss for 9%
TS increased (12.94 to 18.37 MPa)
Pineapple Leaf Microfiber
Cassava EAB decreased (9.23 to 5.73%) [47]
(10, 20, 30, and 40% w/w)
Optimal fiber composition, 30%
Bamboo Optimal TS (3.96 MPa) for alkali
Cassava (10% w/w, untreated, alkali-treated and Biodegradability after 15 days (5.44% loss untreated, 5.97% loss alkali, and [48]
permanganate-treated) 6.15% permanganate)
Increased TS (3.24 to 11.2 MPa)
Coconut Fiber
Cassava Decreased EAB (112 to 20%) [49]
(5–30%)
Decreased water absorption
Sugarcane Bagasse Increased TS (5.6 MPa) and EAB (37%)
Corn [50]
(12%) Biodegradability weight loss of 30–66% after 35 days
Increased TS (7 to 8.7 MPa coffee husk) (7 to 8.1 MPa rice husk)
Coffee and Risk Husk
Corn Decreased EAB (12 to 3% coffee husk) (12 to 3% rice husk) [51]
(1, 5, and 10% w/w)
Decreased moisture content and high thermal stability
TS increased (0.2936 to 0.449 Pa)
Bentonite
Sago EAB decreased (149.72 to 73.93%) [52]
(1, 2, and 3% w/w)
Biodegradability rate increased with higher bentonite content
Silica Bamboo Leaves TS increased (0.53 to 0.75 MPa)
Cassava [53]
(0–5% w/w) EAB increased (0.16 to 0.28%)
Materials 2025, 18, 1762 9 of 32

Table 1. Cont.

Starch Fillers Properties Ref.

Arrowroot Fiber Increased thermal stability (315 to 323 ◦ C)
Arrowroot [54]
(2, 4, 6, 8, and 10% w/w) Biodegradability after 12 days, 10 wt% composted 100%
Increased TS (0.3 to 0.8 MPa)
Oil Palm Mesocarp Fiber
Cassava Decreased EAB (79 to 45%) [55]
(3.5, 7, and 14% w/w)
Thermal stability
Nile Rose Residues Increased TS (11.7 MPa 40 wt% and 18 MPa 60 wt%)
Corn [56]
(0, 20, 40, 60, and 80 wt%) Decreased EAB
Sugar Sugar Palm Fiber Increased TS (4.8 to 10.68 MPa)
[57]
Palm (0.1, 0.2, 0.3, 0.4, 0.5, and 1.0 wt%) Decreased EAB (38.1 to 25.38%)
Walnut Shell Flour Increased TS (9.75 to 16.75 MPa)
Corn [58]
(0, 30, 40, and 50 wt%) Decreased water absorption and increased biodegradability (25% weight loss)
Corn Husks Increased TS at 10 wt%. (3.8 to 10.12 MPa), decreased 20 wt% (5.15 MPa)
Corn [59]
(5, 10, 15, and 20% w/w) Increased EAB (72.35 to 239.76%)
Pine Rosin Increased TS at 15% (6.28 to 10.19 MPa), decreased to 5.9 MPa at 30%
Potato [60]
(0–30%) Lowest water absorption 15% (53.5%) and thermal stability
Wood
Corn Increased TS (6.52 to 12.51 MPa) and EAB (2.60 to 9.43%) [61]
(0, 0.27, 0.54, and 0.81 g/g)
Okra Stalk
Corn Increased TS (11.26 to 19.04) and EAB (0.13–5.14%) [62]
(0–25%)
TS: tensile strength; EAB: elongation at break.

2.2. Essential Oils (EOs)

Essential oils are a group of volatile aromatic compounds belonging to plant families.
They can be obtained from plant parts like leaves, bark, stems, seeds, and flowers. Essential
oil is added to the material to enhance antimicrobial properties. The usage of EOs can reduce
the cost while giving the product higher mechanical properties. The antimicrobial behavior
of EOs is ascribed to the presence of mono/sesquiterpenes, hydrocarbons, and phenolics.
These bioactive compounds interact with the bacterial cell wall’s polysaccharides, fatty
acids, and/or phospholipids, which results in the loss of irons and cellular contents [63].
The use of essential oils has gained momentum in the field of food packaging due to its
antimicrobial properties, and they can extend the shelf lives of products [64]. The findings
are summarized in Table 2.
Souza et al. [65] developed corn starch bioplastic films with nanocellulose-stabilized
pickering emulsions of three essential oils, namely cinnamon, cardamon, and ho wood, at
2 and 5 wt% concentrations. Ho wood has the highest TS (12.9 MPa) and EAB (26.9%), and
cardamon has the lowest mechanical properties (TS 2.4 MPa and EAB 9.1%). The ho wood
essential oil showed strong chemical interactions and thermal stability, giving it potential to
be used for biological activities and be applied in packaging materials, with further studies
needed to evaluate biodegradability.
A recent bioplastic was developed using palm trunk starch. Hernando et al. [66]
mixed 10 g of palm starch and 25% (v/v) of citric acid oil palm solution with varying
amounts of glycerol (10%, 20%, and 30% v/v). As the amount of glycerol increased, the
tensile strength and young modulus decreased, and the elongation at break increased. The
tensile strength dropped from 7.71 to 5.73 MPa, and the lowest tensile strength was seen at
30% v/v 4.03 MPa. The stiffness of the film reduced from 42.54 MPa for 10% v/v to 37.21 and
34.98 MPa with 20% v/v and 30 v/v glycerol, respectively. in regard to elongation, the
elongation increased significantly from 18.07% to 26.47% with an increase in the glycerol
content by 10–20%. When glycerol increased from 20% to 30%, the elongation increased
from 26.47% to 49.37%. After testing the mechanical properties, the samples underwent
biodegradability testing. After 9 days, the bioplastic had the highest weight reductions of
Materials 2025, 18, 1762 10 of 32

34.54, 32.54, and 30.77% for 10–30% v/v glycerol, and after 15 days, it had maximum weight
losses of 92, 92.85, and 94.73%. The bioplastic with 30% v/v of glycerol demonstrated the
ability to have superior qualities, being more environmentally friendly and cost effective;
thus, this bioplastic can be used as a replacement for industrial packaging.
Enidiok et al. [67] used chia oil, ginger starch, and feather keratin to develop a biocom-
posite. The biocomposites contained five films with the same amounts of starch, glycerol,
and keratin and different amounts of chia oil (0, 0.5, 1.0, and 1.5 mL). The addition of
1 mL of chia oil increased the film thickness to 0.22 mm and reduced the moisture content
(12.76%), water solubility (56.98%), and transparency (65.4%). The tensile strength of the
biocomposites increased by 1.75%, 20.2%, and 23.6%, respectively, when compared to the
starch keratin biocomposite without chia oil, and the elongation at break decreased by
35.4%, 45.4%, and 47.4% when compared with the starch keratin biocomposite without
chia oil. Apart from performing the characterization of the biocomposite, we took this
study a step further by coating the biocomposites over fresh tomato. The tomatoes were
submerged into each composite film and then air-dried for a duration of 6 h at 25 ◦ C, and
lastly the tomatoes were placed under laboratory conditions at room temperature with a
relative humidity of 69% and a light/dark cycle of 12 h for 21 days with an assessment
of the post-harvest quality at regular intervals at 3, 6, 9, 12, 15, 18, and 21 days. From the
generated data, it is seen that the addition of chia oil to the ginger starch–feather keratin
biocomposite showed significant effects on the physiochemical, mechanical, thermal, and
preservative properties. The chia oil biocomposites improved the weight loss of the coated
tomatoes and had low effects on the pH, total soluble solids, and ripening index; it also
lowered oxidase activity, delaying the ripening of tomatoes and increasing their shelf life.
Criollo-Feijoo et al. [68] developed a bioplastic with 2% bagasse cassava starch–water
solution with different amounts of oregano essential oils (1, 2, and 3% of total solution) and
0.5% glycerol. We developed a bioplastic with a 100% total ratio of essential oil, starch, and
glycerol. For example, 2% of cassava starch and 0.5% of glycerol were mixed with 97.5% of
water instead of the original volume. The films with 3% oregano essential oil showed total
inhibition against S. aureus (57.81 mm) and E. coli (21.98 mm) and had higher thickness
(164.7 µm), humidity (11.81%), solubility of the films (30.27%), water vapor permeability,
and strain at break (37.9%) but decreased tensile strength (0.39 MPa), which shows that
these films can be used as an active packaging material.
Carvacrol is an essential component of oregano essential oil which exhibits antimicro-
bial activities. Mao et al. [69] developed a potato starch film with different concentrations of
carvacrol (10, 20, and 30% w/w). The incorporation of carvacrol weakened the mechanical
properties of the films from 29.5 to 7.5 MPa for the TS and from 20 to 6% for the EAB and
showed antimicrobial properties against E. coli (28.6 mm) and S. aureus (57.2 mm), where
the inhibition zone increased with an increasing concentration of carvacrol. Despite its
weak mechanical properties, carvacrol was shown to have potential to be used as a coating
for fruits and vegetables.
Peppermint essential oil (PEO) is growing in the food industry, extending the shelf
lives of fruits and vegetables due to its sensory and antimicrobial properties. Srivastava
et al. [70] developed a biocomposite with corn starch, glycerol, and sorbitol with varied
amounts of rice husk fiber (10, 20, 30, 40, and 50% w/w of starch). PEO was added to the
10% w/w rice husk fiber biocomposite at varied amounts (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6% w/w). The
biocomposite with 10% rice husk fiber and 1% PEO had high moisture content (23.85%)
and water solubility (36.36%), the highest TS (2.25 MPa), and a low EAB (14.5%). As the
PEO increased, the TS decreased, and the EAB increased. All the reinforced biocomposites
were biodegradable within 35 days. In regard to the antimicrobial assay, the incorporated
PEO demonstrated the presence of an inhibition zone, where the size increased with a
Materials 2025, 18, 1762 11 of 32

higher percentage of PEO. The incorporated 1% PEO showed an inhibition zone against
Gram-positive (S. aureus 6 mm) and Gram-negative bacteria (E. coli 6 mm). Lastly, a shelf
life assessment was carried out on bread sealed with the biocomposite in which physical
microbial growth was not found due to the release of bioactive components like menthol,
creating a microenvironment inside the package. Overall, the developed biocomposite
film with risk husk fiber and PEO has the potential to be used as a packaging material and
increases the shelf life of food like bread for 30 days, making it a great choice for preserving
food without chemical additives.
Many studies involving adding essential oils into bioplastics and biocomposites have
been conducted, but very few have been conducted on emulsification. Emulsification
helps improve the dispersion of essential oils, improving the properties of biocomposites.
Yang et al. [71] used Zanthoxylum bungeanum essential oil (ZBO) to develop corn starch-
based biofilms with three kinds of emulsifiers: Tween 80 as a small molecule surfactant;
sodium caseinate (CAS), whey protein isolate (WPI), and gelatin (GE) as macromolecule
emulsifiers; and whey protein isolate fibril (WPIF) as a particle emulsifier (emulsions
ZBO 1.0% and emulsifiers 0.1% (g)). The WPIF had a higher TS (8.6 MPa), and Tween
80 had the highest EAB (66%) compared to the control sample. The moisture contents and
total soluble matter were lower with emulsifiers due to the addition of EO increasing the
hydrophobicity, and the EO reduced the thermal stability due to a decrease in temperature
degradation. In terms of antibacterial properties, the CAS and Tween 80 films showed
better antibacterial properties against S. aureus, and CAS and ZBO showed antibacterial
properties against L. monocytogenes. To summarize, this work showed that macromolecule
emulsifiers exhibited the best mechanical and moisture barrier properties and the best
antibacterial properties against S. aureus and L. monocytogenes, showing their potential to be
used in green food packaging materials.
Parada-Quenaya et al. [72] developed potato starch bioplastic films with Stipa obtusa
microfibers (MFSO) (0.15, 0.35 and 0.55% w/w) and eucalyptus essential oil (EEO) (0, 0.17,
and 0.43% w/w) using tape casting. The addition of EEO showed a significant decrease in
elastic modulus from 286.18 to 16.92 MPa.
Castro et al. [73] developed a chitosan/cassava starch biocomposites filled with ben-
tonite clay/GEO particles with different concentrations of ginger essential oil (0.5, 1, and
2 wt% dry mass). The results showed that the addition of ginger essential oil increased
the TS (7.5 to 9.5 MPa) and EAB (11 to 17%) for concentrations of 0 to 1% but decreased
for a 2% GEO concentration (to 6 MPa and 7%) due to the effective dispersion of filler
particles in the polymer matrix. The bentonite clay/GEO filler increased the antimicrobial
properties of the film against S. aureus (3.8 mm) and E. coli (3.65 mm) for a concentration of
1%. The developed films enhanced the mechanical properties and antimicrobial properties,
showing its potential for use in edible films.
Yang et al. [74] used silylated starch, cellulose, glycerol, acrylated epoxidized soybean
oil (AESO), and Tween 80 to develop a bioplastic and cured it for 2 h under different
temperatures (80, 100, 120, and 140 ◦ C) to promote the reaction between silylated starch
and AESO. The AESO acts as a crosslinker. The tensile strength and elongation at break
of the bioplastic without AESO were 8.8 MPa and 7.22%, and they reduced slightly with
the addition of AESO at 80 ◦ C due to the poor dispersion of AESO in the bioplastic. As the
curing temperature increased from 80 to 120 ◦ C, the tensile strength increased, revealing
that the interaction between silyated starch and AESO was enhanced. Lastly, the tensile
strength reduced when the sample temperature increased to 140 ◦ C. As for the elongation at
break, it decreased as the curing temperature increased. The sample at a curing temperature
of 120 ◦ C presented the most satisfactory structures, making it beneficial for packaging
Materials 2025, 18, 1762 12 of 32

applications even though there is weak effect of curing temperature on the interaction of
modified starch and AESO.
In continuation of their previous work, Yang et al. [75] analyzed the effects of silane
hydrolysis time on the physiochemical properties of starch-based epoxidized soybean oil
(ESO). The 3-aminopropyl trimethoxy silane (APTES) was dispersed in distilled water and
hydrolyzed at 50 ◦ C for 0–24 h with NaOH and starch. Once the mixture was neutralized, it
was washed with distilled water and then oven dried for 24 h. The silylated starch samples
were based on the hydrolysis time of APTES, namely 0, 1, 2, 4, 8, and 24 h. The bioplastics
were produced by blending microcrystalline cellulose, glycerol, and silylated starch in
distilled water until gelatinized. Tween 80 and ESO were incorporated into the mixture to
develop the bioplastic. This work focused on mechanical properties, thermogravimetric
analysis, and enzymatic degradation. The most desirable hydrolysis was 2–4 h as it
showed the highest elongation at break and a tensile strength of 8.69 MPa. The water
resistance properties were not improved by the silylation of starch. The bioplastic materials
maintained excellent biodegradability, and APTES hydrolysis for 4 h presented more
satisfactory structural, thermal, and tensile properties for packaging applications.
Enwere et al. [76] used wild cocoyam starch to develop bioplastic films containing
gelatine, glycerin, vegetable oil, and vinegar in which the composition of the materials
varied with the seven different samples produced. The vegetable oil was used to test
whether it is suitable to be used as a plasticizer. The samples were tested to analyze the
mechanical properties, moisture content, water solubility, water absorption, biodegrad-
ability, and structural analysis of the films. From the results obtained, the sample with
the highest tensile strength and elongation at break of 6.5 MPa and 77% and low moisture
content (2.4%), water absorption (20%), and water solubility (49%) was the bioplastic film
with 2 g of gelatine, 1 mL of vinegar, and 3 mL of glycerin. The cocoyam bioplastic aligns
with commercial packaging standards due to the exceeding film thickness of 270 µm and
strength and flexibility but with a limitation of thermal stability.
Recent studies have shown that essential oils are beneficial natural additives for
biocomposites. They enhance antimicrobial and mechanical properties, helping to extend
the shelf lives of biodegradable materials. Additionally, essential oils improve flexibility,
making biocomposites more suitable for packaging and medical applications.

Table 2. Essential oils in starch-based bioplastics.

Starch EO (%) Antimicrobial Activity Properties Ref.

Cinnamon E. coli (43.8–61%) Increased TS (11.21 to 22.09 MPa) and EAB
Amphiphilic [77]
(0.25, 0.5, and 1%) S. aureus (65.9–80.9%) (16.4 to 26.79%), 70% biodegradable after 28 days
Lemon E. coli (45.46%) TS decreased by 28.41%, EAB
Corn/Wheat [78]
(0.5, 1%, and 2%) S. aureus (47.72%) increased by 19.82%
E. coli (23 mm), S. aureus (18 mm), P.
Clove aeruginosa (24 mm), Increased thickness and EAB (9.3 to 5.67%),
Millet [79]
(0–3% w/w) Enterobacter sp. (27 mm), B. cereus (20 mm) decreased TS (10.52 to 6.25 MPa)
and Trichoderma (14 mm)
Orange S. aureus (68%) Increased MC and water solubility, decreased TS
Corn [80]
(0, 0.3, 0.5, and 0.7 µL/g) L. monocytogenes (80%) growth reduction (5.11 to 2.4 MPa) and EAB (64.58 to 15.25%)
Lavender S. aureus (24.5 mm) Increased thickness; decreased water solubility,
Potato [81]
(2, 4, and 6%) E. coli (15.1 mm) absorption, and TS (70.2 to 24.89 MPa)
Improved water barrier properties, TS
Chitosan Rosemary (0.5%) B. subtilis, E. Coli, and L monocytogenes [82]
(25.95 MPa), and EAB (14.87%)
Materials 2025, 18, 1762 13 of 32

Table 2. Cont.

Starch EO (%) Antimicrobial Activity Properties Ref.

TS increased (3.73 to 8.34 MPa) and decreased by
Tea Tree S. aureus (68%)
Cassava 1.5% (3.03 MPa) [83]
(0.08, 0.8, and 1.5% v/v) C. albicans (64%)
EAB decreased
Caraway B. cereus (29.83 mm), E. coli (10.33 mm), TS decreased (15.23 to 12.62 MPa),
Tapioca [84]
(0.5, 1, 2, and 3% w/w) P. aeruginosa (12.63 mm), S. aureus (26.3 mm) EAB decreased (27.84 to 20.94%)
TS: tensile strength; EAB: elongation at break; MC: moisture content.

2.3. Nanoparticles
Nanoparticles, which are particles ranging in size from 1 to 100 nm in diameter,
have gained significant attention in recent years for their innovative incorporation into
biocomposites, enhancing their mechanical, thermal, and functional properties. The most
used nanoparticles are zinc oxide (ZnO), silicon dioxide (SiO2 ), titanium dioxide (TiO2 ),
and calcium carbonate (CaCO3 ), which can block UV radiation and act as antibacterial
agents [85]. Additionally, carbon-based nanoparticles such as graphene derivatives and
carbon nanotube have been widely studied for their reinforcement effect on the polymer
matrix. The findings are summarized in Table 3.
Iacovone et al. [86] developed a biocomposite with TiO2 nanoparticles (NP) using
cassava starch, glycerol, and distilled water using the extrusion method at 80 rpm and
120 rpm with and without TiO2 NP. The samples developed at 80 rpm showed higher
tensile strength (3.2 MPa) but a lower elongation at break (57%). The incorporation of
TiO2 NP decreased the elongation at break by 16% for 80 rpm and increased it by 13% for
120 rpm. Also, the moisture content slightly decreased water resistance for both 80 rpm
(18%) and 120 rpm (19%). Due to its improved properties, the TiO2 NP biocomposite at
120 rpm underwent biodegradability testing. The incorporation of TiO2 NP accelerated
the biodegradation rate and increased the final degradation percentage (106%). TiO2 NP
in cassava starch biocomposites showed potential as a packaging material for its fast-
degrading properties under industrial composting.
Santos et al. [87] developed a potato starch bioplastic incorporating CaCO3 . The
CaCO3 was separated from organic eggshell membranes using the air floatation method
and consolidation process of mixing starch (10, 20, and 30% w/w eggshell dry weight)
with the eggshell suspension, and then it was frozen and dried and then ground to a
powder. The eggshell and eggshell/starch mixture were melt-mixed with low-density
polyethylene (LDPE). The film with 30% starch had the lowest density and was further
tested. When 30% of starch and 50% eggshell were added, the TS and EAB decreased from
20.5 MPa to 14.5 MPa and from 14.1% to 5.8% when compared to the LDPE-COM control
film, with increasing rigidity. The starch consolidation of CaCO3 revealed to have potential
in developing lightweight fillers for LDPE plastics.
Oluwasina et al. [88] developed a bioplastic with physico-electrical properties. They
used cassava starch and waste from dry cell batteries. The bioplastic films were produced
with varying starch compositions, acid-treated Luffa cylindrica cellulose (ALC-cellulose),
and graphene oxide (GO). The bioplastic films had a control bioplastic with just starch and
varying amounts of ALC-cellulose and GO. This paper tested the mechanical properties
and electrical properties. As the concentrations of GO and ALC-cellulose increased, the
moisture content (MC) decreased from 8.4% to 3.5%. For the mechanical properties, ALC-
cellulose contributed more to the increase in tensile strength than GO due to the creation of
intermolecular hydrogen bonding between the starch base and ALC-cellulose. The tensile
strength increased from 0.98 to 1.42 MPa. The ALC-cellulose increased the elongation at
break as compared to the bioplastic with only GO. The highest elongation was 78.40%. The
Materials 2025, 18, 1762 14 of 32

electrical conductivity of the bioplastic with GO and ALC-cellulose showed the highest
conductivity of 14.7 × 10−3 S/m as compared to the other films with starch only and GO.
This paper showed that discarded battery rod graphite and waste Luffa clyindrica L can be
used as raw materials.
Nanoparticles not only enhance mechanical and physiochemical properties, but they
also present antimicrobial activity. Arezoo et al. [89] developed sago starch films with
different concentrations of TiO2 nanoparticles (0, 1, 3, and 5% w/w sago starch) and
cinnamon essential oil (0, 1, 2, and 3% w/w sago starch) and a mixture of glycerol and
sorbitol (1:3) 40% w/w. The increased amounts of TiO2 and CEO led to significant decreases
in water solubility, moisture content, and water absorption. Likewise, the TS decreased
and the EAB increased. The starch film with 5% TiO2 had a higher tensile strength and
lower elongation at break, and as the concentration of CEO increased, the TS decreased
and the elongation at break increased. Lastly, the 5% TiO2 -2% CEO showed the highest
inhibition zone for antimicrobial properties against S. thyphimurium (5 mm), E. coli (6 mm),
and S. aureus (7.5). The higher the concentrations of TiO2 and CEO, the higher the inhibition
zones. TiO2 improved the mechanical and barrier properties while showing antimicrobial
properties, and combining it with CEO showed its great potential for use in active edible
film in food industries.

Table 3. Nanoparticles in starch-based bioplastics.

Nanoparticles Starch Properties Ref.

Cassava MC decreased, TS increased to 10.29 MPa, and EAB decreased to 5.69%;
[90]
(1, 2, 3, 4, and 5% w/w) biodegradation occurred at 7 days
ZnO
Banana TS increased from 2.5 to 36 MPa, and EAB decreased from 28 to 8%; degradation
[91]
(1, 3, and 5% w/w) time was 90 min
Potato Increased EAB (from 52 to 70%) and decreased tensile strength (from 1.1 to
(0–1.5%) 0.2 MPa); biodegradation occurred at 5 days
SiO2 [92]
Corn Increased EAB (from 59.2 to 78.9%) and decreased TS (from 1.05 to 0.6 MPa);
(0–1.5%) biodegradation occurred at 40 days
Increased TS (from 3.55 to 3.95 MPa) and decreased EAB (from 88.1 to 62.5%);
TiO2 Corn [93]
biodegradation with 64% weight loss occurred at 30 days
Potato Increased TS (from 30 to 45 MPa) and decreased EAB (from 20 to 15%)
[94]
(10, 20, 30, 40, and 50% w/w) Decreased water absorption
CaCO3
Cassava Increased TS by up to 4% (3.25 MPa) and decreased EAB (from 53.14 to 26.5%)
[21]
(2, 4, 6, 8, and 10% w/w) Decreased MC, thermally stable
Optimal ratio of starch:chitosan (75:25)
GO Potato Enhanced mechanical properties (TS 26 MPa), water resistance (<10% weight [95]
loss), and electrical conductivity (3.8 × 10−3 S/m)
Increased TS (from 1.6 to 1.75 MPa)
Corn
Copper Decreased EAB (from 26 to 8%) [96]
(0.25, 0.5, 0.75, 1, and 5% w/w)
Antimicrobial against S. aureus and E. coli
TS: tensile strength; EAB: elongation at break; MC: moisture content.

2.4. Polymer Blends

Polylactic acid (PLA) is a linear aliphatic thermoplastic polyester derived from lactic
acid from the fermentation of renewable and biodegradable sources like corn starch and raw
materials with a high sugar content. PLA is biodegradable, renewable, and biocompatible,
but it is brittle and has a low oxygen barrier. Both PLA and starch have opposite mechanical
and barrier properties, making them insufficient for compatibility. To solve this issue
and prevent phase separation, compatibilizers are added to promote polymer interfacial
interaction, improving the properties of the blend. The findings are summarized in Table 4.
Collazo-Bigliardi et al. [97] used grafted poly(ε-caprolactone) (PCL) as a compatibilizer to
develop a corn starch/PLA biocomposite with twelve samples made with pure starch, pure
Materials 2025, 18, 1762 15 of 32

PLA, and starch/PLA (20 and 40%) blends with PCL (2.5 and 5%). The film containing
20% PLA and 5% PCL had good TS and EAB. The incorporation of PCL decreased oxygen
permeability by 40%, showing great potential for food packaging for products like dry or
partially dehydrated products.
Polylactic acid (PLA) has the advantages of being biodegradable and transparent,
with good mechanical properties, and it is safe for food packaging but is limited due to its
high cost. To reduce the cost, PLA is blended with low-cost biopolymers or biofillers that
modify the properties of the resulting composites. Estrada-Giron et al. [98] took advantage
of developing a PLA/Dioscorea remotiflora starch biocomposite, where 50 g of PLA was
mixed with different components of starch (7.5, 15, 22.5, and 30 wt% (dry basis)) using
compression molding, which is a process that avoids applying high shear stresses to the
starch granules. According to the results obtained, the addition of starch affected both the
flexural and tensile strength. As the amount of starch increases, the flexural and tensile
strength decrease due to the reduction in adhesion between the blended materials. The
biocomposite with 7.5 wt% had the highest flexural and tensile strengths of 68.5 MPa and
76.54 MPa. The uniqueness of this work lies in its analyses of the biocomposite, including
water absorption kinetics and dynamic mechanical analysis. PLAs blended with high-
amylose starch exhibited larger water uptake, faster swelling kinetics, a higher crystallinity,
and improved flexural modulus as comparted to PLA alone.
Another study was conducted, taking advantage of PLA and mixing it with starch.
Baniasadi et al. [99] developed a PLA/potato starch biocomposite by mixing PLA granules
with varying concentrations of n-octadecyl isocyanate (ODI) potato starch substance (10,
20, 30, 40, and 50 wt%) using the injection molding method to produce the specimens. A
solvent-free method was used to graft the ODI on the surface of starch to enable the compat-
ibility of the PLA matrix. The increase in the proportion of ODI-starch enhanced the tensile
strength, impact strength, tensile strain, and toughness, with the 20 wt% biocomposite
having high tensile strength (52.3 MPa) and strain (19%). Furthermore, the biocomposite
with 50 wt% was selected for filament production in 3D printing due to its high starch
content even though it had the lowest tensile strength (35.3 MPa) and strain (3%). A variety
of shapes were successfully printed, like simple cups, dog bone specimens, 3D curvatures,
and intricate grid geometries in which there were no issues with the printing process,
indicating excellent stability of the extruded filaments and strong adhesion between layers
with smooth surfaces. The inspiration of using 3D printing shows a significant promise for
the future of sustainable materials, showing the potential for a reduced carbon footprint as
compared to petroleum-based plastics.
Moghaddam et al. [100] developed a biocomposite utilizing PLA and polybutylene
succinate (PBS) using design of experiments with three independent variables, PLA:PBS
(50:50), corn starch, and what straw. The concentrations had a five-level variance in the
ranges of 30–70 for PLA:PBS, 30–60 for cornstarch, and 0–8 wt% corn starch for wheat straw
regarding the mechanical properties, and the equilibrium moisture content was determined
using response surface methodology. The biocomposite film was prepared by mixing dried
corn starch and wheat straw with the PLA:PBS blend along with Joncryl and zinc stearate.
The response surface methodology showed significance with the R2 of the elastic modulus
(EM), elongation at break (EAB), impact strength (IS), and equilibrium moisture content
(EMC) being equal to 0.95, 0.97, 0.97, and 0.99, which shows that the model is accurate
enough to predict the responses. The optimal values predicted by the models for PLA:PBS,
corn starch, and wheat straw were 48.2 wt%, 45.4 wt%, and 6.4 wt%, respectively; the EM,
EAB, IS, and EMC were 80.8 MPa, 11.4%, 2 kJ/m2 , and 4.1%. The experimental results
for the EM, EAB, IS, and EMC were 76.9 MPa, 10.9%, 2.1 kJ/m2 , and 4.4%, showing no
significant difference between the experimental data and predicted values. As seen from
Materials 2025, 18, 1762 16 of 32

the optimal results, a disposable container was prepared using injection molding with a
biodegradability rate of 71.1% in the fifth month, showing that it is inexpensive to develop
due to having more natural polymers in the biocomposite.
Kurup et al. [101] studied the impact of processing parameters on the compatibility and
performance of PLA/tapioca starch biocomposites. PLA and tapioca starch were combined
with maleic-grafted PLA as coupling agent and epoxidized palm oil as a plasticizer in ratio
of 65.7:27.9:4.9:2, and response surface methodology was used to find the optimization
of impact of processing parameters. The Box–Behnken design was used with three-level
factors, three independent variables (injection temperature, injection pressure, and injection
speed), one measured response (tensile strength), and 17 experimental runs. The injection
temperature had the most significant influence on tensile strength in which the highest
tensile strength was at around 180 ◦ C, and a higher injection speed decreased the tensile
strength caused by shear-induced degradation. The model estimated a tensile strength
of 25.808 MPa using an injection temperature of 181 ◦ C, an injection pressure of 40 MPa,
and an injection speed of 300 mm/s, and the experimental data show a tensile strength of
25.344 MPa, which falls within the predicted value with error of just 1.78%. The optimized
biocomposite had a maximum water absorption rate of 1.95% after 10 days, an elongation
at break of 16%, which is lower than PP but higher than PLA, and a biodegradation rate of
2.84%, showing great potential as short-term packaging material. This paper focused more
on optimization processing parameters for the industrial scale rather than different ratios
of the biocomposites, showing potential for industry use.
Oluwasina et al. [102] developed a bioplastic of starch and bis(2-hydroxyethyl) tereph-
thalate (BHET). The polyethylene terephthalate (PET) water bottles were crushed into
smaller particles and washed with NaOH solution of a 1:10 solid-to-liquid ratio, followed
by rinsing with hot water and drying. The bioplastic was developed by adding BHET
(1 g, 425 µm) and distilled water (50 mL) while being heated at 90 ◦ C with the addition
of glycerin. The mixture was stirred continuously until 100 ◦ C was reached and then
casted into a Teflon mold, and the film was then oven-dried (70 ◦ C). Different films were
developed with the addition of 0%, 20%, 40%, 60%, and 80% of BHET (5 g of starch).
These films were compared to the bioplastic with starch only. The results showed a low
moisture content and water solubility decreasing from 40.54% to 23.45%, showing that
bioplastics produced with BHET can withstand water-related challenges. The mechanical
properties were significantly affected by the addition of BHET, which affected the tensile
strength, elongation, and Young’s Modulus. The 40% BHET concentration resulted in the
best mechanical properties because it had the highest tensile strength (2.59 MPa), stable
elongation, and Young’s modulus.
Mohammed et al. [103] developed a wheat starch/polyvinyl alcohol (PVA) biocom-
posite with different concentrations of sugar palm fibers (3, 6, 9, and 12 wt% of starch).
The blending of starch and PVA improved the mechanical properties. The addition of PVA
reduced the moisture content (9.17%) but increased it with the addition of fibers (10.24%).
The improvement in tensile strength occurred at 9 %wt. fiber, which was 12 MPa, but the
3 %wt. concentration had the highest EAB at 66.3%. Reinforcing starch/PVA has shown
improvement; the 9 %wt concentration showed the best properties as it showed more
resistance to water uptake, thermal stability, and good mechanical properties, with no
recommendations for use in industrial applications.
Materials 2025, 18, 1762 17 of 32

Table 4. Compatibilizers for starch/PLA biocomposites.

Starch Compatibilizer Properties Ref.

Decreased TS (from 45 to 21 MPa)
Oligo (lactic acid) Increased EAB (from 5 to 35%)
Cassava [104]
(1, 2, 3, and 5 wt%) Improved extensibility, water and oxygen vaper
barrier properties, and thermal stability
Epoxidized sesame oil Increased deformation and decreased TS
Yam [105]
(1.5 and 3 wt%) Thermal stability
Glycidyl methacrylate Decreased TS (from 37.4 to 23.3 MPa)
Cassava [106]
(1 wt%) Increased EAB (from 3.6 to 8.6%)
Materials 2025, 18, x FOR PEER REVIEW 17 of 33
TS: tensile strength; EAB: elongation at break.

3. CurrentIndustrial
3. Current Industrial Applications
Applications
Renewable
Renewable biomaterial
biomaterialresources derived
resources from bioplastics
derived and biocomposites
from bioplastics have
and biocomposites have
emerged as an enticing research area for academia and industry, offering a promising sus-
emerged as an enticing research area for academia and industry, offering a promising
tainable solution to the global plastic waste crisis. Driven by growing social and environ-
sustainable solution to the global plastic waste crisis. Driven by growing social and
mental awareness, the industrial sector has undergone significant changes in recent years,
environmental
with manufacturers awareness, the industrial
increasingly sector has undergone
adopting cradle-to-grave significant
product designs changes in recent
and tech-
years,
niques. with manufacturers
This shift increasingly
has led to the integration adopting
of bioplastics andcradle-to-grave product
biocomposites derived from designs and
renewable biomaterials
techniques. This shift[107,108].
has led to the integration of bioplastics and biocomposites derived
fromAs discussed in
renewable this review, starch-derived
biomaterials [107,108]. bioplastics and biocomposites dominate
industrial applications due to their low cost, abundance, and excellent film-forming prop-
As discussed in this review, starch-derived bioplastics and biocomposites dominate
erties. Additionally, their distinct physical properties, including biodegradability, renew-
industrial applications due to their low cost, abundance, and excellent film-forming proper-
ability, and adaptability, make them highly suitable for various industries. These bio-
ties. Additionally,
materials their
are applicable distinctagriculture,
in packing, physical properties, including
automotive, textile, biodegradability,
biomedical, consumer renewabil-
ity, andand
goods, adaptability, make themproviding
electronics applications, highly suitable for various
a sustainable, industries.
eco-friendly These
alternative that biomaterials
aligns
are with environmental
applicable in packing,and agriculture,
circular economy concerns, astextile,
automotive, shown in Figure 3 [108].
biomedical, consumer goods,
This section provides an in-depth examination of the industrial implementation
and electronics applications, providing a sustainable, eco-friendly alternative of that aligns
starch-based bioplastics, highlighting trends, recent advancements, challenges, and a fu-
with environmental and circular economy concerns, as shown in Figure 3 [108].
ture perspective on their adoption.

Figure 3.3.Industrial
Figure Industrialapplications of starch-derived
applications bioplastics/biocomposites.
of starch-derived bioplastics/biocomposites.

3.1. Packaging Industry

The packing industry is considered the largest consumer of starch-based bioplastics,
accounting for over 50% of the global bioplastic market. These materials offer excellent,
unique physical properties in their biodegradability as they have moderate mechanical
Materials 2025, 18, 1762 18 of 32

This section provides an in-depth examination of the industrial implementation of

starch-based bioplastics, highlighting trends, recent advancements, challenges, and a future
perspective on their adoption.

3.1. Packaging Industry

The packing industry is considered the largest consumer of starch-based bioplastics,
accounting for over 50% of the global bioplastic market. These materials offer excellent,
unique physical properties in their biodegradability as they have moderate mechanical
strength and can act as barriers against weather conditions. They are usually applied in
biodegradable wraps, bags, and food containers [109].
Recent advancements have been implemented in these biomaterials, where nanoparti-
cles such as nanoclays, cellulose nanofibers, and graphene oxide enhance their mechanical
strength and barrier properties. The studies by Tang et al. [110] and Martins et al. [111]
demonstrated that nanoclay is significantly incorporated into starch-based films, which
improves their tensile mechanical strength and water resistance.
Likewise, other studies showed the use of biopolymer blends, such as starch–polyvinyl
alcohol composites, to improve moisture resistance. Also, others demonstrated that starch-
based foams are being developed as an alternative to expanded polystyrene for cushioning
and protective packing applications [112]. Further advancements in biodegradation ki-
netics have also enabled researchers to optimize formulations for specific environmental
conditions [113].
A study conducted by Dutta et al. [114] focused on developing starch-based intelligent
packing films that integrate natural antioxidants to improve their use for food preservation.
The research incorporated rosemary and green tea extracts with starch-based bioplastics,
improving the oxidative stability of packaging food products. Similarly, Wang et al. [115]
studied starch–chitosan composite films and investigated their antimicrobial properties,
showing that they are ideal for for protecting various perishable food items.

3.2. Agricultural Applications

These biomaterial films and composites have shown promising applications in the
agricultural field, mainly in mulch films, seed coating, and formulating controlled-released
fertilizers. These manufactured films enhanced soil moisture retention, reduced weed
growth, and improved crop production and yield in terms of biomass [116].
Starch-based controlled-release fertilizers (CRFs) are the trends in innovative appli-
cations in recent research. This implies that the main macronutrients and micronutrients
in starch-derived hydrogels allow for controlled nutrient release, improving the efficiency
of nutrient use and mitigating environmental pollution. Also, scientists have examined
the potential of starch-based films reinforced with biochar and lignin to further enhance
their structural integrity for improved water resistance, as other advances in crosslinking
techniques and polymer blending have further enhanced the mechanical stability of these
synthesized agro starch-based biofilms [117]. Shelar et al. [118] studied the use of starch-
based biodegradable seed coatings with embedded micronutrients. The findings indicated
improved seed germination rates and seedling vigor. This approach is considered a new
pathway for sustainable agricultural application, leading to more successful implementa-
tion and increased production. Also, Quilez et al. [119] studied the effect of starch-polyGly
blends in mulch films, reporting enhanced UV resistance, prolonged soil protection, and
increased soil amendments.
Materials 2025, 18, 1762 19 of 32

3.3. Textile Industry

Different biodegradable and nonwoven fibers have been explored in starch-derived
bioplastic development. These materials are mainly utilized in single-use hygiene products
such as diapers, wipes, and sanitary napkins [120].
Recent industrial improvements have been implemented to advance the mechanical
properties of starch-based nanofiber fabrication through advanced electrospinning technol-
ogy [121]. Khoo et al. [112] demonstrated that starch nanofibers exhibit high porosity and
surface area, making them suitable for air and water filtration applications. Others sug-
gested incorporating natural antimicrobial agents like essential oils with chitosan polymer
in their matrix to enhance the antimicrobial properties of these fibers. Starch-based coating
methods on textiles have also been used to provide hydrophobicity and antimicrobial
properties against many microbial strains [122].
On the other hand, Zhara et al. [123] explored the application of starch-based
nanofibers in medical textiles, showing that these nanofibers improved moisture man-
agement and breathability. Additionally, Biehl et al. [124] studied the starch–protein com-
pound in formulating hybrid fibers for implementation in sustainable fashion applications,
revealing a controlled improvement in biodegradability and increasing mechanical and
tensile strengths.

3.4. Automotive Industry

The automotive industry has embraced starch-based bioplastics to improve fuel ef-
ficiency and reduce vehicle weight. Different interior components of vehicles have been
created with starch-based biocomposites, like the dashboards, door panels, and seat cush-
ions, using biocomposites combined with natural fibers like flax, hemp, and jute [125].
On the other hand, vehicle seats and headrests are currently made with biodegradable
foams made from starch, providing a sustainable alternative to conventional-based foams
and offering a light weight. Studies indicate that starch-based nanocomposites can be
infused with nanoclays or graphene, which significantly improves the thermal stability
and mechanical strength of this nanocomposite and advances the automotive industry’s
performance [125].
Oh et al. [126] studied starch-based thermosetting resins for automotive applications,
revealing improved heat resistance and impact strength. Thapliyal et al. [127] developed
biofiber-reinforced starch composites for reducing carbon emissions and light-weight
automotive panels during vehicle operation.

3.5. Biomedical Applications

Starch-derived bioplastics are extensively valuable for biomedical applications for
their non-toxicity and biocompatibility with controlled degradation properties. Primar-
ily, they are utilized in wound dressing, drug delivery systems, and tissue engineering
scaffolds [128,129]. Rai et al. [130] demonstrated the excellent absorption properties and
high oxygen barrier properties of biopolymer-based hydrogels, which make them effective
in wound-healing applications.
Others showed that starch/nanoparticles have excelled in delivering targeted drugs
because their controlled degradation allows for precise medication release. Advances in 3D
printing technology have also enabled the fabrication of starch-based scaffolds for bone
and cartilage regeneration [131].

3.6. Electronic Industry

The electronic industry has adopted starch-based biocomposites for manufacturing
biodegradable casing and components. These materials provide an eco-friendly alternative
Materials 2025, 18, 1762 20 of 32

to traditional petroleum-based polymers used as primary components on electronic devices.

Starch-based composites reinforced with natural fibers have been used for casing mobile
phones, laptops, and electronic accessories [132].
Besides that, other advanced formulations integrate nanoclays and biopolymers with
starch-based biocomposites to improve their thermal and mechanical stability. However,
large production and material optimization are still challenges that require further research
to offer cost-effective solutions [133].

3.7. Consumer Goods

Starch-derived bioplastics are increasingly used in disposable consumer goods, includ-
ing plates, cutlery, and food containers. Different companies, such as Biome Technologies
and Novamont, have developed starch-derived bioplastic products that fully degrade in a
composting environment, thus reducing the waste accumulation crisis [133,134].
Research conducted by Muñoz-Gimena et al. [135] demonstrated starch-based
biodegradability for cosmetics packing, showing improved stability and an extended
shelf life. Also, Lepak-Kuc et al. [136] showed that starch derived from potato can be
used in synthesizing flexible films for electronic packing, revealing superior mechanical
flexibility and biodegradability.
Innovations in processing techniques like injection molding, twin-screw compound-
ing, and reactive extrusion have enhanced these starch-based biomaterials’ mechanical
properties and esthetic quality. Even so, researchers are still improving these materials’
stability and usability to overcome the challenges of moisture resistance [137].

3.8. Construction
Plastic in construction is commonly used in pipes, insulation, floor coverings, ca-
bles, and more. Bioplastic materials have great application potential but come with the
challenges of high cost and resistance to different heavy workload conditions [138]. Also,
construction material is preferable for conventional plastics as the properties of bioplas-
tics, like mechanical strength and life span, are not guaranteed. With these challenges,
researchers developed bioplastic construction materials with the use of reinforcement to
improve mechanical properties.
Lignocellulosic fiber-reinforced biocomposites are commonly used in construction
products like window frames and doors because of their strong mechanical properties,
hydrophobic properties, and biodegradability. Vitola et al. [139] developed a biocomposite
from potato starch-based binders and hemp shives, and the mechanical properties improved
with addition of both sodium metasilicate and glycerol, resulting in enhanced compressive
strength. The results highlight the potential of these modified binders to be used for
sustainable building materials.

4. Environmental and Economic Impacts

Implementing bioplastic-based materials as a viable, sustainable alternative to con-
ventional petroleum-based plastic materials has recently captured significant concerns in
various applications. These escalating concerns are aligned with social and environmental
attempts to mitigate the effects of plastic pollution, the climate change crisis, resource
depletion, and biodiversity loss. Bioplastic materials, mainly those derived from natural
raw resources, are now replacing existing conventional plastic materials in fostering driven
economic growth and consumer demands alongside the circular economy approaches. This
section provides an in-depth, comprehensive, compelling analysis of the sustainability of
bioplastics through life cycle assessments, discussing the biodegradation and recycling
Materials 2025, 18, 1762 21 of 32

process, the circular economy of bioplastics, and the economic feasibility of large-scale
products and regulations.

4.1. Sustainability: Life Cycle Assessments of Bioplastics

Life cycle assessment (LCA) for bioplastic materials is classified as a primary sustain-
ability tool to assess the environmental footprint of bioplastics, especially their waste and
their environmental and social impacts. As is known, these materials encompass differ-
ent renewable sources to end-of-life disposal using different innovative biodegradation
and recycling approaches [140]. Mainly, what is derived from natural raw resources like
starch-based polymers and other polymers such as polylactic acid (PLA) are considered
unequivocal plastics, which exhibit a lower carbon footprint than conventional plastic
materials. A recent study conducted by Mastrolia et al. [141] demonstrated that PLA’s
global warming potential is markedly lower than that of other chemical polymer structures
like polyethylene and polypropylene materials because it relies on plant-based feedstocks
that can actively absorb atmospheric CO2 , thus lowering the effect of gas emissions on the
total global warming potential.
However, assessing the sustainability considerations for these bioplastic materials
extends beyond their effect in the mitigation of greenhouse gas emissions. Other factors
play an important role in evaluating their sustainability in different fields. For example,
for agriculture fields, what type of agricultural practices are conducted in land fields, how
does water resource consumption influence the bioplastics used for these practices, and
what is its overall environmental performance and sustainability in its implementation
and disposal? Lizundia et al.’s [142] study highlights that producing large-scale bioplastic
materials at a commercial agricultural scale could intensify competition for arable land
and freshwater resources, affecting and threatening food security. Furthermore, the energy-
intensive nature of producing certain bioplastic materials can contribute to the overall
environmental benefits, mainly if it is counted in the account of the fossil fuel aspect [143].
Consequently, optimizing the selection of agricultural feedstock and integrating renewable
energy into production are essential in enhancing the sustainability of bioplastics [144].

4.2. Degradation and Recycling

Biodegradability and recyclability for bioplastics have gained significant interest in in-
dustries seeking sustainable green material alternatives to replace conventional petroleum-
based plastic, which is often discarded into the environment. Various strategies and policies
have been explored to manage bioplastic waste, focusing on biodegradation and thermal
and mechanical degradation. One study focused on the bioplastics derived from polylactic
acid (PLA) and the biodegradation of polyhydroxyalkanoates (PHB), where their actual
degradation potential rate is highly dependent on specific environmental conditions, like
soil burial, and biodegradation in soil and compositing is considered as an effective disposal
method [144,145]. However, there are specific challenges in optimizing the degradation rate
to match waste management policies. Some industrial composting facilities provide the
necessary optimal heat. Microbial activity exists to degrade and break down PLA effectively
into environmentally safe compounds and does not cause any real environmental issues
or crises [146]. Even in ambient and less controlled environments like marine settings
or landfills, the process of degradation can be dramatically slower than in other places
and sites. This discrepancy gap raises serious concerns about the potential longevity for
bioplastics to persist in environmental degradation and decomposition under suboptimal
degradation conditions [146,147].
Another recent review discusses various bioplastic recycling routes, emphasizing
the mechanical recycling approach for mainly PLA-based bioplastic materials through
Materials 2025, 18, 1762 22 of 32

challenges in maintaining material integrity after multiple recycling cycles, limiting their
applicability for high-performance products [147]. Thermal degradation techniques, such as
pyrolysis, have also been implemented to recover energy and valuable chemical compounds
from bioplastic waste [109,147]. It was noticed that this method’s efficiency relies on the
type of bioplastic waste from which the polymer structure was used in the synthesis.
Besides that, innovative chemical recycling methods, such as hydrolysis and glycolysis,
can be used to deconstruct the biopolymer through the depolymerization technique into
monomers, facilitating the creation of re-polymerized PLA into virgin-quality PLA [145].
Therefore, prioritizing the development of closed-loop recycling systems for bioplastics is
not merely crucial. However, enhancing circular economy initiative demands and strategies
is essential. Besides that, it also contributes to significantly minimizing and reducing the
environmental impact for a more sustainable future with a truly eco-friendly solution to
fight the environmental crisis [146]. Despite these efforts in recycling bioplastic waste, there
is still a need to set up more standardized waste management policies and infrastructure
and facilities to be able to provide an optimized recycling process for a large scale of
bioplastic waste and to cover all valuable materials [144].

4.3. Circular Economy and Bioplastics

Integrating bioplastics into the circular economy framework is essential to maximize
their environmental and economic benefits and potential. A circular economy seeks to
minimize and reduce waste and lessen resource consumption by promoting the principles
of reuse, recycling, and regeneration of materials. A life cycle assessment study emphasizes
the importance of bioplastic materials in manufacturing products to significantly reduce
the dependence on fossil fuels. Thus, the environmental gains can only be realized with
the proper disposal of this bioplastic waste through specific biodegradation and recycling
approaches [142].
Unlike the traditional linear economic approach of the “take–make–dispose of” model,
a circular economy strategy for bioplastics emphasizes sustainable sourcing, an efficient
production scale, and responsibility for end-of-life management [120]. Therefore, in order
to achieve circularity in bioplastics, it is crucial to develop advanced state-of-the-art re-
cycling infrastructure and industrial compositing facilities that can effectively, efficiently,
and perfectly handle biodegradable plastics. Moreover, innovative designs of bioplastics
with improved mechanical properties, stability, and chemical recycling compatibility can
extend their lifecycle. Also, this will reduce the dependency on virgin materials; therefore,
groundbreaking advancements in bioplastic formulations, such as incorporating bio-based
additives and reinforcing fibers, can bolster durability and recyclability, further promoting
a circular economy [142,148].

4.4. Economic Impacts

Different parameters like product costs, consumer demand, and regulatory policies
and frameworks markedly influence the economic feasibility of bioplastics. Currently, bio-
plastics require and face higher production expenses than conventional plastic due to main
factors such as intricate feedstock cultivation, fermentation process, and polymerization
complexities. Nevertheless, the landscape is changing as advances in bioprocessing tech-
nologies and an increased production scale contribute to cost reductions, making bioplastic
production more feasible and viable at a large commercial scale [148,149].
The market demands for bioplastics are steadily growing, propelled by growing con-
sumer preferences, their social and environmental commitment to sustainable products,
and stringent policies aimed at combating plastic pollution. The European Union’s direc-
tives on single-use plastic and extended producer responsibility (EPR) schemes effectively
Materials 2025, 18, 1762 23 of 32

incentivize adopting and transitioning to biodegradable and compostable alternative plas-

tics [150]. In the United States, state-level bans and support for utilizing eco-friendly
packing also ignite enthusiasm for bioplastics and further stimulate interest in bioplas-
tics [131,148].
Investment in bioplastic research and development has become more of a focused,
driven field for economic impact. Therefore, it is crucial to overcome existing limitations by
finding more solutions for these limitations to overcome them and foster economic viability.
A recent study by Market Research Future (2023) predicted that the global bioplastics
market will reach USD 30 billion by 2030, unveiling vast opportunities in green packing,
agriculture, and biomedical fields. Strategic government subsidies, tax incentives, and
collaborative efforts between the academic research field and industry will be significant
and pivotal in fostering innovation and reducing production costs to enhance the economic
competitiveness of bioplastics. This concerted approach will enhance bioplastics’ economic
attractiveness and lead to more sustainable, greener solutions to transition to a more
sustainable economy [151].

5. Challenges and Future Prospects

Many scientists and researchers have developed bioplastics composed of starch, pro-
tein, PLA, cellulose, fibers, nanoparticles, and much more, showing their great potential
to replace conventional plastics, but there are challenges in developing them. Firstly, de-
veloping bioplastics and biocomposites with excellent mechanical and thermal properties,
oxygen permeability, gas barriers, and water vapor transmission rates is challenging. It is
important to understand the relationships between the formulation and performance of
the material, which includes the structure, processing conditions, shape, and applications.
There is ample information about their mechanical and thermal properties, but there are
several elements that need to be investigated more. These include the interactions between
the different components in the formulations of bioplastics and understanding the effect of
formulation on the temperature-dependent properties of the material [152,153].
Another challenge is that bioplastics do not solve the pollution issue even though
they are an alternative to conventional plastics. It is very important to educate consumers
and governments to build effective infrastructure for collection, recycling, and composting.
These infrastructures must have the capacity for large-scale biodegradation and by-products
of biodegradation, stressing the importance of returning materials to the environment
without negative effects [154]. For example, one of the leading bioplastics in the market is
PLA-based bioplastics, but degradation only occurs under industrial composting conditions
at high temperatures. Industrial composting is a controlled process and requires high
temperatures above 60 ◦ C and may take between 90 and 120 days to fully biodegrade, but
misuse leads to waste mismanagement [155].
The number of products produced from cellulose, chitosan, lignin, and starch is grow-
ing, but these are limited by the availability of resources and manufacturing processes,
which are sometimes not environmentally friendly. The green technology available to
modify these sources pose a great challenge in terms of economic viability. For example, it
may seem straightforward to develop a starch- or cellulose-based bioplastic, but when it
comes to industrial-scale or source extraction, the price estimates for the process, source,
and additive are not established adequately, which affects the final price of the bioplastic.
Nevertheless, marginal production costs can be reduced by improving chemical technolo-
gies and processes limiting price increases. However, these enhancements require higher
capital investment than what is currently in place. Due to this financial constraint, many
companies opt to continue producing conventional plastics instead, and it also prevents
them from being motivated to invest in bioplastics [153,156].
Materials 2025, 18, 1762 24 of 32

Bioplastics face a challenge from the high cost of being marketed as compared to
conventional plastics. They are limited in production and mechanical and barrier proper-
ties. Bioplastics have an issue competing with conventional low-cost plastics due to their
deficiencies in their formulation, processing, and end-of-life disposal. Currently, there
are cheap options available, but they have not completely displaced petroleum-derived
plastics due to economic reasons for the company and consumers. Based on the time
spent on developing bioplastics by scientists and researchers, the use of bioplastics can
reduce the environmental burden, but completely transitioning from petroleum-based
plastics to bioplastics can create new burdens with agriculture and competition for food
resources [155,157].
The future of bioplastics looks promising, driven by the need for sustainable and eco-
nomically friendly materials. The key is for consumers to be educated about how to recycle
and degrade bioplastics with the help of the government to spend more funds on building
effective collection, recycling, and composting infrastructure. Many governments, plastic
companies, and consumers are starting to support the circular economy, which accelerates
the potential of bioplastics due to their bright future in packaging. The rise in consumer and
industrial demand for home-compostable and/or fully marine-biodegradable bioplastics
and polymers that are degradable in any environment are expected to leave the future
bioplastic market with the exclusion of PLA due to it only being industrially compostable.
Recently and in the future, bioplastics will begin to develop from renewable sources such as
PHA or other plant-based bioplastics and become commercialized, with innovative ways of
improving their mechanical, physiochemical, and thermal properties to make them sustain-
able. Marine algae are a promising alternative to develop bioplastics due to their abundant
biomass and ability to degrade plastics through toxins or enzymes [158]. The future of
bioplastics looks promising, driven by technological advancements, economic incentives,
and policy reforms aimed at tackling plastic-related challenges. With continued innovation
and strategic support, bioplastics can play a pivotal role in reducing the environmental
impact and advancing the goal of carbon neutrality [153,155,159].

6. Conclusions
Starch-based bioplastics have shown significant potential as sustainable alternatives
to conventional plastics. Incorporating natural fillers, essential oils, nanoparticles, and PLA
has enhanced the mechanical, thermal, and barrier properties of bioplastics, making them
feasible in industrial applications. The essential oils in biocomposites showed antimicrobial
activity and enhanced flexibility, whereas the starch/PLA blend had improved flexibil-
ity, reduced cost, and enhanced biodegradation. These bioplastics have been developed
and explored in many industrial applications, like packaging, agriculture, textiles, the
automotive industry, consumer goods, electronics, and construction, offering promising
eco-friendly solutions.
However, several challenges remain, like their inherent hydrophilicity, limited thermal
stability, and high production costs, but advances in material modifications, processing
techniques, and the integration of biodegradable additives could help address these limita-
tions. Moreover, while starch bioplastics present significant environmental benefits, their
large-scale adoption depends on improvements in cost-effectiveness, waste management
strategies, and regulatory support.
Future research should focus on optimizing formulations, scaling up production,
and evaluating long-term environmental impacts to enhance commercial feasibility. Col-
laboration between academia, industry, and policymakers will be crucial in overcoming
current challenges and promoting the widespread adoption of starch-based bioplastics in a
circular bioeconomy.
 Future research should focus on optimizing formulations, scaling up production, and
evaluating long‐term environmental impacts to enhance commercial feasibility. Collabo‐
ration between academia, industry, and policymakers will be crucial in overcoming cur‐
Materials 2025, 18, 1762 rent challenges and promoting the widespread adoption of starch‐based bioplastics 25in
of a
32
circular bioeconomy.

Author Contributions: Original draft preparation, writing, reviewing, and editing, M.O.S.; reviewing
and supervision, F.A. and M.P.K.; reviewing and supervision, S.S. and R.H. All authors have read
and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding: This research is sponsored by the Collaborative Research Initiative Grant Scheme
(C-RIGS24-016-0022) from IIUM and the IIIT Strategic Research Programme (IIIT-SRP24-038-0038)
from the International Institute of Islamic Thought.

Institutional Review Board Statement: Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement: Informed consent was obtained from all subjects involved in the study.

Data Availability Statement: No new data were created or analyzed in this study.

Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

Abbreviations
AESO Acrylated epoxidized soybean oil
APTES 3-aminopropyl trimethoxy silane
BHET Bis(2-hydroxyethyl) Terephthalate
BU Betaine:urea
CCNC Cellulose nanocrystals from corn husk
CCU Choline chloride:urea
EAB Elongation at break
EO Essential oil
LBMD Locust bean milling dust
LCA Life cycle assessment
LDPE Low density polyethylene
ODI n-octadecyl isocyanate
OPP Olive pit powder
PCL Poly(ε-caprolactone)
PEO Peppermint essential oil
PLA Polylactic acid
PVA Polyvinyl alcohol
ROEO Rosmarinus officinalis essential oil
TS Tensile strength
ZBO Zanthoxylum bungeanum essential oil
Materials 2025, 18, 1762 26 of 32

References
1. Geyer, R. A Brief History of Plastics. In Mare Plasticum—The Plastic Sea: Combatting Plastic Pollution Through Science and Art;
Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2020; pp. 31–47. [CrossRef]
2. Agamuthu, P.; Mehran, S.B.; Norkhairah, A.; Norkhairiyah, A. Marine Debris: A Review of Impacts and Global Initiatives. Waste
Manag. Res. J. Sustain. Circ. Econ. 2019, 37, 987–1002. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
3. Bergmann, M.; Collard, F.; Fabres, J.; Gabrielsen, G.W.; Provencher, J.F.; Rochman, C.M.; van Sebille, E.; Tekman, M.B. Plastic
Pollution in the Arctic. Nat. Rev. Earth Environ. 2022, 3, 323–337. [CrossRef]
4. Dokl, M.; Copot, A.; Krajnc, D.; Van Fan, Y.; Vujanović, A.; Aviso, K.B.; Tan, R.R.; Kravanja, Z.; Čuček, L. Global Projections of
Plastic Use, End-of-Life Fate and Potential Changes in Consumption, Reduction, Recycling and Replacement with Bioplastics to
2050. Sustain. Prod. Consum. 2024, 51, 498–518. [CrossRef]
5. Prata, J.C.; da Costa, J.P.; Lopes, I.; Duarte, A.C.; Rocha-Santos, T. Environmental Exposure to Microplastics: An Overview on
Possible Human Health Effects. Sci. Total Environ. 2020, 702, 134455. [CrossRef]
6. Shen, M.; Huang, W.; Chen, M.; Song, B.; Zeng, G.; Zhang, Y. (Micro)Plastic Crisis: Un-Ignorable Contribution to Global
Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Climate Change. J. Clean. Prod. 2020, 254, 120138. [CrossRef]
7. Alobi, N.; Sunday, E.; Magu, T.; Oloko, G.; Nyong, B. Analysis of Starch from Non- Edible Root and Tubers as Sources of Raw
Materials for the Synthesis of Biodegradable Starch Plastics. J. Basic. Appl. Res. Biomed. 2017, 3, 27–32.
8. Brockhaus, S.; Petersen, M.; Kersten, W. A Crossroads for Bioplastics: Exploring Product Developers’ Challenges to Move beyond
Petroleum-Based Plastics. J. Clean. Prod. 2016, 127, 84–95. [CrossRef]
9. Xie, D.; Zhang, R.; Zhang, C.; Yang, S.; Xu, Z.; Song, Y. A Novel, Robust Mechanical Strength, and Naturally Degradable Double
Crosslinking Starch-Based Bioplastics for Practical Applications. Int. J. Biol. Macromol. 2023, 253, 126959. [CrossRef]
10. Otache, M.A.; Duru, R.U.; Achugasim, O.; Abayeh, O.J. Advances in the Modification of Starch via Esterification for Enhanced
Properties. J. Polym. Environ. 2021, 29, 1365–1379. [CrossRef]
11. Tan, S.X.; Andriyana, A.; Ong, H.C.; Lim, S.; Pang, Y.L.; Ngoh, G.C. A Comprehensive Review on the Emerging Roles of
Nanofillers and Plasticizers towards Sustainable Starch-Based Bioplastic Fabrication. Polymers 2022, 14, 664. [CrossRef]
12. Jayarathna, S.; Andersson, M.; Andersson, R. Recent Advances in Starch-Based Blends and Composites for Bioplastics Applica-
tions. Polymers 2022, 14, 4557. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
13. Rahardiyan, D.; Moko, E.M.; Tan, J.S.; Lee, C.K. Thermoplastic Starch (TPS) Bioplastic, the Green Solution for Single-Use
Petroleum Plastic Food Packaging—A Review. Enzym. Microb. Technol. 2023, 168, 110260. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
14. Pérez, S.; Bertoft, E. The Molecular Structures of Starch Components and Their Contribution to the Architecture of Starch Granules:
A Comprehensive Review. Starch Stärke 2010, 62, 389–420. [CrossRef]
15. Nafchi, A.M.; Moradpour, M.; Saeidi, M.; Alias, A.K. Thermoplastic Starches: Properties, Challenges, and Prospects. Starch Stärke
2013, 65, 61–72. [CrossRef]
16. Cristofoli, N.L.; Lima, A.R.; Tchonkouang, R.D.N.; Quintino, A.C.; Vieira, M.C. Advances in the Food Packaging Production from
Agri-Food Waste and By-Products: Market Trends for a Sustainable Development. Sustainability 2023, 15, 6153. [CrossRef]
17. Marichelvam, M.K.; Jawaid, M.; Asim, M. Corn and Rice Starch-Based Bio-Plastics as Alternative Packaging Materials. Fibers
2019, 7, 32. [CrossRef]
18. Sultan, N.F.K.; Johari, W.L.W. The Development of Banana Peel/Corn Starch Bioplastic Film: A Preliminary Study. In Biore-
mediation Science and Technology Research; Public Knowledge Project: Drive Burnaby, BC, Canada, 2017; Volume 5, pp. 12–17;
ISSN 2289-5892. [CrossRef]
19. Lenz, D.M.; Tedesco, D.M.; Camani, P.H.; dos Santos Rosa, D. Multiple Reprocessing Cycles of Corn Starch-Based Biocomposites
Reinforced with Curauá Fiber. J. Polym. Environ. 2018, 26, 3005–3016. [CrossRef]
20. Romani, V.P.; Prentice-Hernández, C.; Martins, V.G. Active and Sustainable Materials from Rice Starch, Fish Protein and Oregano
Essential Oil for Food Packaging. Ind. Crops Prod. 2017, 97, 268–274. [CrossRef]
21. Syafri, E.; Kasim, A.; Abral, H.; Asben, A. Effect of Precipitated Calcium Carbonate on Physical, Mechanical and Thermal
Properties of Cassava Starch Bioplastic Composites. Int. J. Adv. Sci. Eng. Inf. Technol. 2017, 7, 1950. [CrossRef]
22. Abral, H.; Dalimunthe, M.H.; Hartono, J.; Efendi, R.P.; Asrofi, M.; Sugiarti, E.; Sapuan, S.M.; Park, J.W.; Kim, H.J. Charac-
terization of Tapioca Starch Biopolymer Composites Reinforced with Micro Scale Water Hyacinth Fibers. Starch Stärke 2018,
70, 1700287. [CrossRef]
23. Zuraida, A.; Nur Humairah, A.R.; Nur Izwah, A.W.; Siti Naqiah, Z. The Study of Glycerol Plasticized Thermoplastic Sago Starch.
In Proceedings of the Advanced Materials Research; AMR: Greenwood Village, CO, USA, 2012; Volume 576, pp. 289–292.
24. Podshivalov, A.; Zakharova, M.; Glazacheva, E.; Uspenskaya, M. Gelatin/Potato Starch Edible Biocomposite Films: Correlation
between Morphology and Physical Properties. Carbohydr. Polym. 2017, 157, 1162–1172. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
25. Faruk, O.; Bledzki, A.K.; Fink, H.P.; Sain, M. Biocomposites Reinforced with Natural Fibers: 2000–2010. Prog. Polym. Sci. 2012,
37, 1552–1596. [CrossRef]
Materials 2025, 18, 1762 27 of 32

26. Sienkiewicz, N.; Dominic, M.; Parameswaranpillai, J. Natural Fillers as Potential Modifying Agents for Epoxy Composition: A
Review. Polymers 2022, 14, 265. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
27. Lopes, J.; Pettersen, M.K.; Grøvlen, M.S.; Sharmin, N.; Li, K.D.; Wetterhus, E.; Ferreira, P.; Coimbra, M.A.; Gonçalves, I. Heat-
Sealable Bioplastic Films of Blended Locust Bean and Potato Byproducts for Active Packaging of Fatty Foods: Cheese and Oat
Cookies as Case Studies. Food Hydrocoll. 2024, 147, 109322. [CrossRef]
28. Hazrol, M.D.; Sapuan, S.M.; Zainudin, E.S.; Wahab, N.I.A.; Ilyas, R.A. Effect of Kenaf Fibre as Reinforcing Fillers in Corn
Starch-Based Biocomposite Film. Polymers 2022, 14, 1590. [CrossRef]
29. Majamo, S.L.; Amibo, T.A. Study on Extraction and Characterization of Anchote (Coccinia abyssinica) Starch and Reinforced Enset
(Ensete ventricosum) Fiber for the Production of Reinforced Bioplastic Film. Heliyon 2024, 10, e23098. [CrossRef]
30. ASTM D3039/D3039M; Standard Test Method for Tensile Properties of Polymer Matrix Composite Materials. ASTM International:
West Conshohocken, PA, USA, 2017.
31. Chaffa, T.Y.; Meshesha, B.T.; Mohammed, S.A.; Jabasingh, S.A. Production, Characterization, and Optimization of Starch-Based
Biodegradable Bioplastic from Waste Potato (Solanum tuberosum) Peel with the Reinforcement of False Banana (Ensete ventricosum)
Fiber. Biomass Convers. Biorefinery 2022, 14, 27365–27377. [CrossRef]
32. Santana, I.; Felix, M.; Bengoechea, C. Sustainable Biocomposites Based on Invasive Rugulopteryx Okamurae Seaweed and
Cassava Starch. Sustainability 2024, 16, 76. [CrossRef]
33. Ekielski, A.; Żelaziński, T.; Kulig, R.; Kupczyk, A. Properties of Biocomposites Made of Extruded Apple Pomace and Potato
Starch: Mechanical and Physicochemical Properties. Materials 2024, 17, 2681. [CrossRef]
34. Zdanowicz, M.; Rokosa, M.; Pieczykolan, M.; Antosik, A.K.; Chudecka, J.; Mikiciuk, M. Study on Physicochemical Properties of
Biocomposite Films with Spent Coffee Grounds as a Filler and Their Influence on Physiological State of Growing Plants. Int. J.
Mol. Sci. 2023, 24, 7864. [CrossRef]
35. Dilkushi, H.A.S.; Jayarathna, S.; Manipura, A.; Chamara, H.K.B.S.; Edirisinghe, D.; Vidanarachchi, J.K.; Priyashantha, H.
Development and Characterization of Biocomposite Films Using Banana Pseudostem, Cassava Starch and Poly (Vinyl Alcohol):
A Sustainable Packaging Alternative. Carbohydr. Polym. Technol. Appl. 2024, 7, 100472. [CrossRef]
36. Aaliya, B.; Sunooj, K.V.; Vijayakumar, A.; Krina, P.; Navaf, M.; Parambil Akhila, P.; Raviteja, P.; Mounir, S.; Lackner, M.; George, J.;
et al. Fabrication and Characterization of Talipot Starch-Based Biocomposite Film Using Mucilages from Different Plant Sources:
A Comparative Study. Food Chem. 2024, 438, 138011. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
37. Oluba, O.M.; Owoso, T.O.; Bayo-Olorunmeke, A.O.; Erifeta, G.O.; Josiah, S.J.; Ojeaburu, S.I.; Subbiah, N.; Palanisamy, T. Probing
the Role of Ginger Starch on Physicochemical and Thermal Properties of Gum Arabic Hybrid Biocomposite for Food Packaging
Applications. Carbohydr. Polym. Technol. Appl. 2025, 9, 100650. [CrossRef]
38. Lounis, F.M.; Benhacine, F.; Hadj-Hamou, A.S. Improving Water Barrier Properties of Starch Based Bioplastics by Lignocellulosic
Biomass Addition: Synthesis, Characterization and Antibacterial Properties. Int. J. Biol. Macromol. 2024, 283, 137823. [CrossRef]
39. Torres-Vargas, O.; Campos Paéz, M.; Lema González, M. Corn Starch Based Biocomposite Films Reinforced with Cellulosic
Nanocrystals Extracted from Corn Husks (Zea mays L.): Characterization and Application in Cherry Tomato Packaging. Ind.
Crops Prod. 2025, 225, 120486. [CrossRef]
40. Charles, A.L.; Nero, Z.; Sulmartiwi, L.; Triningtyas, P.H.; Putra, N.R.; Abdillah, A.A.; Alamsjah, M.A. Characterization of a
Biocomposite Film Using Coconut Jelly Powder to Improve Arrowroot Starch and Sodium Alginate Film Forming Properties. Int.
J. Biol. Macromol. 2025, 292, 139161. [CrossRef]
41. Guno, F.J.R.; Mopera, L.; Santiago, D.M.; Elegado, F.; Galeon, P.L. Optimization of Biocomposite Taro (Colocasia esculenta (L.)
Schott) Starch and Aloe Vera (Aloe barbadensis (L.) Burm.f.) Gel Based Film-Using Response Surface Methodology. Int. J. Biol.
Macromol. 2025, 305, 140960. [CrossRef]
42. Kedir, W.M.; Geletu, A.K.; Weldegirum, G.S. Spider Web-Reinforced Chitosan/Starch Biopolymer for Active Biodegradable Food
Packaging. Appl. Food Res. 2024, 4, 100526. [CrossRef]
43. Behera, L.; Mohanta, M.; Thirugnanam, A. Intensification of Yam-Starch Based Biodegradable Bioplastic Film with Bentonite for
Food Packaging Application. Environ. Technol. Innov. 2022, 25, 102180. [CrossRef]
44. Singh, P.; Kaur, G.; Singh, A.; Kaur, P. Starch Based Bio-Nanocomposite Films Reinforced with Montmorillonite and Lemongrass
Oil Nanoemulsion: Development, Characterization and Biodegradability. J. Food Meas. Charact. 2023, 17, 527–545. [CrossRef]
45. Ren, J.; Dang, K.M.; Pollet, E.; Avérous, L. Preparation and Characterization of Thermoplastic Potato Starch/Halloysite Nano-
Biocomposites: Effect of Plasticizer Nature and Nanoclay Content. Polymers 2018, 10, 808. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
46. Mutmainna, I.; Tahir, D.; Gareso, P.L.; Ilyas, S.; Saludung, A. Improving Degradation Ability of Composite Starch/Chitosan by Ad-
ditional Pineapple Leaf Microfibers for Food Packaging Applications. IOP Conf. Ser. Mater. Sci. Eng. 2019, 593, 012024. [CrossRef]
47. Jaafar, J.; Siregar, J.P.; Oumer, A.N.; Hamdan, M.H.M.; Tezara, C.; Salit, M.S. Experimental Investigation on Performance of Short
Pineapple Leaf Fiber Reinforced Tapioca Biopolymer Composites. Bioresources 2019, 13, 6341–6355. [CrossRef]
48. Yusof, F.M.; Wahab, N.’A.; Abdul Rahman, N.L.; Kalam, A.; Jumahat, A.; Mat Taib, C.F. Properties of Treated Bamboo Fiber
Reinforced Tapioca Starch Biodegradable Composite. Mater. Today Proc. 2019, 16, 2367–2373. [CrossRef]
Materials 2025, 18, 1762 28 of 32

49. Lomelí Ramírez, M.G.; Satyanarayana, K.G.; Iwakiri, S.; De Muniz, G.B.; Tanobe, V.; Flores-Sahagun, T.S. Study of the Properties
of Biocomposites. Part I. Cassava Starch-Green Coir Fibers from Brazil. Carbohydr. Polym. 2011, 86, 1712–1722. [CrossRef]
50. Fitch-Vargas, P.R.; Camacho-Hernández, I.L.; Rodríguez-González, F.J.; Martínez-Bustos, F.; Calderón-Castro, A.; Zazueta-
Morales, J.d.J.; Aguilar-Palazuelos, E. Effect of Compounding and Plastic Processing Methods on the Development of Bioplastics
Based on Acetylated Starch Reinforced with Sugarcane Bagasse Cellulose Fibers. Ind. Crops Prod. 2023, 192, 116084. [CrossRef]
51. Collazo-Bigliardi, S.; Ortega-Toro, R.; Boix, A.C. Reinforcement of Thermoplastic Starch Films with Cellulose Fibres Obtained
from Rice and Coffee Husks. J. Renew. Mater. 2018, 6, 599–610. [CrossRef]
52. Zamrud, Z.; Ng, W.M.; Salleh, H.M. Effect of Bentonite Nanoclay Filler on the Properties of Bioplastic Based on Sago Starch. IOP
Conf. Ser. Earth Environ. Sci. 2021, 765, 012009. [CrossRef]
53. Oluwasina, O.O.; Akinyele, B.P.; Olusegun, S.J.; Oluwasina, O.O.; Mohallem, N.D.S. Evaluation of the Effects of Additives on the
Properties of Starch-Based Bioplastic Film. SN Appl. Sci. 2021, 3, 421. [CrossRef]
54. Tarique, J.; Sapuan, S.M.; Khalina, A.; Ilyas, R.A.; Zainudin, E.S. Thermal, Flammability, and Antimicrobial Properties of
Arrowroot (Maranta arundinacea) Fiber Reinforced Arrowroot Starch Biopolymer Composites for Food Packaging Applications.
Int. J. Biol. Macromol. 2022, 213, 1–10. [CrossRef]
55. Campos, A.; Sena Neto, A.R.; Rodrigues, V.B.; Luchesi, B.R.; Mattoso, L.H.C.; Marconcini, J.M. Effect of Raw and Chemically
Treated Oil Palm Mesocarp Fibers on Thermoplastic Cassava Starch Properties. Ind. Crops Prod. 2018, 124, 149–154. [CrossRef]
56. Ibrahim, M.M.; Moustafa, H.; El Rahman, E.N.A.; Mehanny, S.; Hemida, M.H.; El-Kashif, E. Reinforcement of Starch Based
Biodegradable Composite Using Nile Rose Residues. J. Mater. Res. Technol. 2020, 9, 6160–6171. [CrossRef]
57. Ilyas, R.A.; Sapuan, S.M.; Ibrahim, R.; Abral, H.; Ishak, M.R.; Zainudin, E.S.; Atikah, M.S.N.; Mohd Nurazzi, N.; Atiqah, A.;
Ansari, M.N.M.; et al. Effect of Sugar Palm Nanofibrillated Cellulose Concentrations on Morphological, Mechanical and Physical
Properties of Biodegradable Films Based on Agro-Waste Sugar Palm (Arenga pinnata (Wurmb.) Merr) Starch. J. Mater. Res. Technol.
2019, 8, 4819–4830. [CrossRef]
58. Sarsari, N.A.; Pourmousa, S.; Tajdini, A. Physical and Mechanical Properties of Walnut Shell Flour-Filled Thermoplastic Starch
Composites. Bioresources 2016, 11, 6968–6983. [CrossRef]
59. Lenhani, G.C.; dos Santos, D.F.; Koester, D.L.; Biduski, B.; Deon, V.G.; Machado Junior, M.; Pinto, V.Z. Application of Corn Fibers
from Harvest Residues in Biocomposite Films. J. Polym. Environ. 2021, 29, 2813–2824. [CrossRef]
60. Sakhare, K.M.; Borkar, S.P.; Kale, R.D. Fabrication and Characterization of Bio Composite Based on Jute Fiber and Pine Rosin
Modified Potato Starch. J. Chem. Health Risks 2023, 13, 258–271.
61. Cheng, W. Preparation and Properties of Lignocellulosic Fiber/CaCO3 /Thermoplastic Starch Composites. Carbohydr. Polym.
2019, 211, 204–208. [CrossRef]
62. Guleria, A.; Singha, A.S.; Rana, R.K. Mechanical, Thermal, Morphological, and Biodegradable Studies of Okra Cellulosic Fiber
Reinforced Starch-Based Biocomposites. Adv. Polym. Technol. 2018, 37, 104–112. [CrossRef]
63. Zubair, M.; Shahzad, S.; Hussain, A.; Pradhan, R.A.; Arshad, M.; Ullah, A. Current Trends in the Utilization of Essential Oils for
Polysaccharide-and Protein-Derived Food Packaging Materials. Polymers 2022, 14, 1146. [CrossRef]
64. Syafiq, R.; Sapuan, S.M.; Zuhri, M.Y.M.; Ilyas, R.A.; Nazrin, A.; Sherwani, S.F.K.; Khalina, A. Antimicrobial Activities of Starch-
Based Biopolymers and Biocomposites Incorporated with Plant Essential Oils: A Review. Polymers 2020, 12, 2403. [CrossRef]
65. Souza, A.G.; Ferreira, R.R.; Paula, L.C.; Mitra, S.K.; Rosa, D.S. Starch-Based Films Enriched with Nanocellulose-Stabilized
Pickering Emulsions Containing Different Essential Oils for Possible Applications in Food Packaging. Food Packag. Shelf Life 2021,
27, 100615. [CrossRef]
66. Hernando, H.; Marpongahtun; Julianti, E.; Nuryawan, A.; Amaturrahim, S.A.; Piliang, A.F.R.; Yanhar, M.R.; Goei, R.; Soyke-
abkaew, N.; Saputra, A.M.A.; et al. Impact of Glycerol on Oil Palm Trunk Starch Bioplastics Enhanced with Citric-Acid Epoxidized
Palm Oil Oligomers. Case Stud. Chem. Environ. Eng. 2024, 10, 100839. [CrossRef]
67. Enidiok, E.S.; Enidiok, S.E.; Anakor, D.O.; Erifeta, G.O.; Thanikaivelan, P.; Oluba, O.M. Development and Characterization of Chia
Oil-Activated Ginger Starch-Feather Keratin Biocomposite for Prolonged Post-Harvest Preservation of Tomato Fruits. Carbohydr.
Polym. Technol. Appl. 2024, 7, 100464. [CrossRef]
68. Criollo-Feijoo, J.; Salas-Gomez, V.; Cornejo, F.; Auras, R.; Salazar, R. Cassava Bagasse Starch and Oregano Essential Oil as a
Potential Active Food Packaging Material: A Physicochemical, Thermal, Mechanical, Antioxidant, and Antimicrobial Study.
Heliyon 2024, 10, e36150. [CrossRef]
69. Mao, S.; Li, F.; Zhou, X.; Lu, C.; Zhang, T. Characterization and Sustained Release Study of Starch-Based Films Loaded with
Carvacrol: A Promising UV-Shielding and Bioactive Nanocomposite Film. Lebensm. Wiss. Technol. 2023, 180, 114719. [CrossRef]
70. Srivastava, V.; Singh, S.; Das, D. Development and Characterization of Peppermint Essential Oil/Rice Husk Fibre/ Corn Starch
Active Biocomposite Film and Its Performance on Bread Preservation. Ind. Crops Prod. 2024, 208, 117765. [CrossRef]
71. Yang, Q.; Zheng, F.; Chai, Q.; Li, Z.; Zhao, H.; Zhang, J.; Nishinari, K.; Zhao, M.; Cui, B. Effect of Emulsifiers on the Properties of
Corn Starch Films Incorporated with Zanthoxylum Bungeanum Essential Oil. Int. J. Biol. Macromol. 2024, 256, 128382. [CrossRef]
Materials 2025, 18, 1762 29 of 32

72. Parada-Quinayá, C.; Garces-Porras, K.; Flores, E. Development of Biobased Films Incorporated with an Antimicrobial Agent and
Reinforced with Stipa Obtusa Cellulose Microfibers, via Tape Casting. Results Mater. 2024, 24, 100637. [CrossRef]
73. Castro, D.; Podshivalov, A.; Ponomareva, A.; Zhilenkov, A. Study of the Reinforcing Effect and Antibacterial Activity of Edible
Films Based on a Mixture of Chitosan/Cassava Starch Filled with Bentonite Particles with Intercalated Ginger Essential Oil.
Polymers 2024, 16, 2531. [CrossRef]
74. Yang, J.; Chen, Y.; Li, C.; Ching, Y.C.; Wang, R.; Wei, Y.; Liang, G.; Xu, S. Synthesis and Characterization of Bioplastics Based on
Silyated Starch and Acrylated Epoxidized Soybean Oil. Ind. Crops Prod. 2024, 222, 119670. [CrossRef]
75. Yang, J.; Xu, S.; Ching, Y.C.; Chuah, C.H.; Wang, R.; Li, C.; Wei, Y.; Liang, G. Effects of Silane Hydrolysis Time on the Physicochem-
ical Properties of Bioplastics Based on Starch and Epoxidized Soybean Oil. Food Chem. 2024, 460, 140601. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
76. Enwere, C.F.; Okafor, I.S.; Adeleke, A.A.; Petrus, N.; Jakada, K.; Olosho, A.I.; Ikubanni, P.P.; Paramasivam, P.; Ayuba, S. Production
of Bioplastic Films from Wild Cocoyam (Caladium bicolor) Starch. Results Eng. 2024, 24, 103132. [CrossRef]
77. He, X.; Li, M.; Gong, X.; Niu, B.; Li, W. Biodegradable and Antimicrobial CSC Films Containing Cinnamon Essential Oil for
Preservation Applications. Food Packag. Shelf Life 2021, 29, 100697. [CrossRef]
78. Song, X.; Zuo, G.; Chen, F. Effect of Essential Oil and Surfactant on the Physical and Antimicrobial Properties of Corn and Wheat
Starch Films. Int. J. Biol. Macromol. 2018, 107, 1302–1309. [CrossRef]
79. Al-Hashimi, A.G.; Ammar, A.B.; Lakshmanan, G.; Cacciola, F.; Lakhssassi, N. Development of a Millet Starch Edible Film
Containing Clove Essential Oil. Foods 2020, 9, 184. [CrossRef]
80. do Evangelho, J.A.; da Silva Dannenberg, G.; Biduski, B.; el Halal, S.L.M.; Kringel, D.H.; Gularte, M.A.; Fiorentini, A.M.; da Rosa
Zavareze, E. Antibacterial Activity, Optical, Mechanical, and Barrier Properties of Corn Starch Films Containing Orange Essential
Oil. Carbohydr. Polym. 2019, 222, 114981. [CrossRef]
81. Jamróz, E.; Juszczak, L.; Kucharek, M. Investigation of the Physical Properties, Antioxidant and Antimicrobial Activity of
Ternary Potato Starch-Furcellaran-Gelatin Films Incorporated with Lavender Essential Oil. Int. J. Biol. Macromol. 2018,
114, 1094–1101. [CrossRef]
82. Akhter, R.; Masoodi, F.A.; Wani, T.A.; Rather, S.A. Functional Characterization of Biopolymer Based Composite Film: Incorpora-
tion of Natural Essential Oils and Antimicrobial Agents. Int. J. Biol. Macromol. 2019, 137, 1245–1255. [CrossRef]
83. Silveira, M.P.; Silva, H.C.; Pimentel, I.C.; Poitevin, C.G.; da Costa Stuart, A.K.; Carpiné, D.; de Matos Jorge, L.M.; Jorge, R.M.M.
Development of Active Cassava Starch Cellulose Nanofiber-Based Films Incorporated with Natural Antimicrobial Tea Tree
Essential Oil. J. Appl. Polym. Sci. 2020, 137, 48726. [CrossRef]
84. Bharti, S.K.; Pathak, V.; Alam, T.; Arya, A.; Singh, V.K.; Verma, A.K.; Rajkumar, V. Starch Bio-Based Composite Active Edible Film
Functionalized with Carum carvi L. Essential Oil: Antimicrobial, Rheological, Physic-Mechanical and Optical Attributes. J. Food
Sci. Technol. 2022, 59, 456–466. [CrossRef]
85. Anugrahwidya, R.; Armynah, B.; Tahir, D. Bioplastics Starch-Based with Additional Fiber and Nanoparticle: Characteristics and
Biodegradation Performance: A Review. J. Polym. Environ. 2021, 29, 3459–3476. [CrossRef]
86. Iacovone, C.; Yulita, F.; Cerini, D.; Peña, D.; Candal, R.; Goyanes, S.; Pietrasanta, L.I.; Guz, L.; Famá, L. Effect of TiO2 Nanoparticles
and Extrusion Process on the Physicochemical Properties of Biodegradable and Active Cassava Starch Nanocomposites. Polymers
2023, 15, 535. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
87. Santos, J.D.C.; Brites, P.; Martins, C.; Nunes, C.; Coimbra, M.A.; Ferreira, P.; Gonçalves, I. Starch Consolidation of
Calcium Carbonate as a Tool to Develop Lightweight Fillers for LDPE-Based Plastics. Int. J. Biol. Macromol. 2023,
226, 1021–1030. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
88. Oluwasina, O.; Aderibigbe, A.; Ikupoluyi, S.; Oluwasina, O.; Ewetumo, T. Physico-Electrical Properties of Starch-Based Bioplastic
Enhanced with Acid-Treated Cellulose and Graphene Oxide Fillers. Sustain. Chem. Environ. 2024, 6, 100093. [CrossRef]
89. Arezoo, E.; Mohammadreza, E.; Maryam, M.; Abdorreza, M.N. The Synergistic Effects of Cinnamon Essential Oil and Nano TiO2
on Antimicrobial and Functional Properties of Sago Starch Films. Int. J. Biol. Macromol. 2020, 157, 743–751. [CrossRef]
90. Abdullah, A.H.D.; Putri, O.D.; Fikriyyah, A.K.; Nissa, R.C.; Hidayat, S.; Septiyanto, R.F.; Karina, M.; Satoto, R. Harnessing the
Excellent Mechanical, Barrier and Antimicrobial Properties of Zinc Oxide (ZnO) to Improve the Performance of Starch-Based
Bioplastic. Polym. Plast. Technol. Mater. 2020, 59, 1259–1267. [CrossRef]
91. Sapei, L.; Padmawijaya, K.S.; Sijayanti, O.; Wardhana, P.J. Study of the Influence of ZnO Addition on the Properties of Chitosan-
Banana Starch Bioplastics. In Proceedings of the IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering; Institute of Physics
Publishing: Bristol, UK, 2017; Volume 223.
92. de Azêvedo, L.C.; Rovani, S.; Santos, J.J.; Dias, D.B.; Nascimento, S.S.; Oliveira, F.F.; Silva, L.G.A.; Fungaro, D.A. Study of
Renewable Silica Powder Influence in the Preparation of Bioplastics from Corn and Potato Starch. J. Polym. Environ. 2021,
29, 707–720. [CrossRef]
93. Amin, M.R.; Chowdhury, M.A.; Kowser, M.A. Characterization and Performance Analysis of Composite Bioplastics Synthesized
Using Titanium Dioxide Nanoparticles with Corn Starch. Heliyon 2019, 5, e02009. [CrossRef]
Materials 2025, 18, 1762 30 of 32

94. Dawale, S.A.; Bhagat, M.M.; Scholar, R. Preparation and Characterization of Potato Starch Based Film Blended with CaCO3
Nanoparticles. Int. J. Eng. Sci. Comput. 2018, 8, 16013.
95. Alves, Z.; Ferreira, N.M.; Ferreira, P.; Nunes, C. Design of Heat Sealable Starch-Chitosan Bioplastics Reinforced with Reduced
Graphene Oxide for Active Food Packaging. Carbohydr. Polym. 2022, 291, 119517. [CrossRef]
96. López, O.V.; Villanueva, M.E.; Copello, G.J.; Villar, M.A. Flexible Thermoplastic Starch Films Functionalized with Copper Particles
for Packaging of Food Products. Funct. Compos. Mater. 2020, 1, 6. [CrossRef]
97. Collazo-Bigliardi, S.; Ortega-Toro, R.; Chiralt, A. Using Grafted Poly(ε-Caprolactone) for the Compatibilization of Thermoplastic
Starch-Polylactic Acid Blends. React. Funct. Polym. 2019, 142, 25–35. [CrossRef]
98. Estrada-Girón, Y.; Fernández-Escamilla, V.V.A.; Martín-del-Campo, A.; González-Nuñez, R.; Canché-Escamilla, G.; Uribe-
Calderón, J.; Tepale, N.; Aguilar, J.; Moscoso-Sánchez, F.J. Characterization of Polylactic Acid Biocomposites Filled with Native
Starch Granules from Dioscorea Remotiflora Tubers. Polymers 2024, 16, 899. [CrossRef]
99. Baniasadi, H.; Äkräs, L.; Madani, Z.; Silvenius, F.; Fazeli, M.; Lipponen, S.; Vapaavuori, J.; Seppälä, J. Development and
Characterization of Polylactic Acid/Starch Biocomposites—From Melt Blending to Preliminary Life Cycle Assessment. Int. J. Biol.
Macromol. 2024, 279, 135173. [CrossRef]
100. Abdollahi Moghaddam, M.R.; Hesarinejad, M.A.; Javidi, F. Characterization and Optimization of Polylactic Acid and Polybutylene
Succinate Blend/Starch/Wheat Straw Biocomposite by Optimal Custom Mixture Design. Polym. Test. 2023, 121, 108000. [CrossRef]
101. Kurup, G.; Fadzillah, M.F.F.B.M.; Royan, N.R.R.; Radzuan, N.A.M.; Sulong, A.B. Impact of Processing Parameters on the
Compatibility and Performance of PLA/Tapioca Starch Biocomposites for Short-Term Food Packaging Applications. Mater. Today
Commun. 2025, 43, 111651. [CrossRef]
102. Oluwasina, O.O.; Adebayo, M.A.; Akinsola, M.O.; Olorunfemi, T.E.; Olajide, J.D. Influence of 2-Hydroxyethyl Terephthalate from
Waste Polyethylene Plastic on the Properties of Starch-BHET Bioplastics. Waste Manag. Bull. 2024, 2, 203–213. [CrossRef]
103. Mohammed, A.A.B.A.; Hasan, Z.; Borhana Omran, A.A.; Elfaghi, A.M.; Ali, Y.H.; Akeel, N.A.A.; Ilyas, R.A.; Sapuan, S.M. Effect
of Sugar Palm Fibers on the Properties of Blended Wheat Starch/Polyvinyl Alcohol (PVA)-Based Biocomposite Films. J. Mater.
Res. Technol. 2023, 24, 1043–1055. [CrossRef]
104. Noivoil, N.; Yoksan, R. Oligo (Lactic Acid)-Grafted Starch: A Compatibilizer for Poly (Lactic Acid)/Thermoplastic Starch Blend.
Int. J. Biol. Macromol. 2020, 160, 506–517. [CrossRef]
105. Ortega-Toro, R.; López-Córdoba, A.; Avalos-Belmontes, F. Epoxidised Sesame Oil as a Biobased Coupling Agent and Plasticiser in
Polylactic Acid/Thermoplastic Yam Starch Blends. Heliyon 2021, 7, e06176. [CrossRef]
106. Palai, B.; Biswal, M.; Mohanty, S.; Nayak, S.K. In Situ Reactive Compatibilization of Polylactic Acid (PLA) and Thermoplastic
Starch (TPS) Blends; Synthesis and Evaluation of Extrusion Blown Films Thereof. Ind. Crops Prod. 2019, 141, 111748. [CrossRef]
107. Chang, B.P.; Mohanty, A.K.; Misra, M. Studies on Durability of Sustainable Biobased Composites: A Review. RSC Adv. 2020,
10, 17955–17999. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
108. Formela, K.; Zedler; Hejna, A.; Tercjak, A. Reactive Extrusion of Bio-Based Polymer Blends and Composites–Current Trends and
Future Developments. Express Polym. Lett. 2018, 12, 24–57. [CrossRef]
109. Gamage, A.; Thiviya, P.; Mani, S.; Ponnusamy, P.G.; Manamperi, A.; Evon, P.; Merah, O.; Madhujith, T. Environmental Properties
and Applications of Biodegradable Starch-Based Nanocomposites. Polymers 2022, 14, 4578. [CrossRef]
110. Tang, K.H.D.; Zhou, J. Ecotoxicity of Biodegradable Microplastics and Bio-Based Microplastics: A Review of in Vitro and in Vivo
Studies. Environ. Manag. 2024, 75, 663–679. [CrossRef]
111. Martins, P.; Brito-Pereira, R.; Ribeiro, S.; Lanceros-Mendez, S.; Ribeiro, C. Magnetoelectrics for Biomedical Applications: 130 Years
Later, Bridging Materials, Energy, and Life. Nano Energy 2024, 126, 109569. [CrossRef]
112. Khoo, P.S.; Ilyas, R.A.; Uda, M.N.A.; Hassan, S.A.; Nordin, A.H.; Norfarhana, A.S.; Ab Hamid, N.H.; Rani, M.S.A.; Abral, H.;
Norrrahim, M.N.F. Starch-Based Polymer Materials as Advanced Adsorbents for Sustainable Water Treatment: Current Status,
Challenges, and Future Perspectives. Polymers 2023, 15, 3114. [CrossRef]
113. Ebrahimzade, I.; Ebrahimi-Nik, M.; Rohani, A.; Tedesco, S. Towards Monitoring Biodegradation of Starch-Based Bioplastic in
Anaerobic Condition: Finding a Proper Kinetic Model. Bioresour. Technol. 2022, 347, 126661. [CrossRef]
114. Dutta, D.; Sit, N. A Comprehensive Review on Types and Properties of Biopolymers as Sustainable Bio-based Alternatives for
Packaging. Food Biomacromolecules 2024, 1, 58–87. [CrossRef]
115. Wang, X.; Tarahomi, M.; Sheibani, R.; Xia, C.; Wang, W. Progresses in Lignin, Cellulose, Starch, Chitosan, Chitin, Alginate,
and Gum/Carbon Nanotube (Nano) Composites for Environmental Applications: A Review. Int. J. Biol. Macromol. 2023,
241, 124472. [CrossRef]
116. El-Beltagi, H.S.; Basit, A.; Mohamed, H.I.; Ali, I.; Ullah, S.; Kamel, E.A.R.; Shalaby, T.A.; Ramadan, K.M.A.; Alkhateeb, A.A.; Ghaz-
zawy, H.S. Mulching as a Sustainable Water and Soil Saving Practice in Agriculture: A Review. Agronomy 2022, 12, 1881. [CrossRef]
117. Salama, K.; Geyer, M. Plastic Mulch Films in Agriculture: Their Use, Environmental Problems, Recycling and Alternatives.
Environments 2023, 10, 179. [CrossRef]
Materials 2025, 18, 1762 31 of 32

118. Shelar, A.; Nile, S.H.; Singh, A.V.; Rothenstein, D.; Bill, J.; Xiao, J.; Chaskar, M.; Kai, G.; Patil, R. Recent Advances in Nano-Enabled
Seed Treatment Strategies for Sustainable Agriculture: Challenges, Risk Assessment, and Future Perspectives. Nanomicro Lett.
2023, 15, 54. [CrossRef]
119. Quilez-Molina, A.I.; Chandra Paul, U.; Merino, D.; Athanassiou, A. Composites of Thermoplastic Starch and Lignin-Rich
Agricultural Waste for the Packaging of Fatty Foods. ACS Sustain. Chem. Eng. 2022, 10, 15402–15413. [CrossRef]
120. Grancarić, A.M.; Jerković, I.; Tarbuk, A. Bioplastics in Textiles. Polim. Časopis Plast. Gumu 2013, 34, 9–14.
121. Drzal, L.T.; Mohanty, A.K.; Misra, M. Bio-Composite Materials as Alternatives to Petroleum-Based Composites for Automotive
Applications. Magnesium 2001, 40, 1–3.
122. Rungruangkitkrai, N.; Phromphen, P.; Chartvivatpornchai, N.; Srisa, A.; Laorenza, Y.; Wongphan, P.; Harnkarnsujarit, N. Water
Repellent Coating in Textile, Paper and Bioplastic Polymers: A Comprehensive Review. Polymers 2024, 16, 2790. [CrossRef]
123. Zhara, H.; Adeel, S.; Özomay, Z.; Mia, R. Properties and Performance Relationship of Biopolymers in Textile Industry. In
Biopolymers in the Textile Industry: Opportunities and Limitations; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2024; pp. 87–121.
124. Biehl, P.; Zhang, K. Introduction to Advances in Bio-Based Polymers: Chemical Structures and Functional Properties at the
Interface. In Green by Design: Harnessing the Power of Bio-Based Polymers at Interfaces; IOP Publishing: Bristol, UK, 2024; pp. 1–69.
125. Schutz, G.F.; de Ávila Gonçalves, S.; Alves, R.M.V.; Vieira, R.P. A Review of Starch-Based Biocomposites Reinforced with Plant
Fibers. Int. J. Biol. Macromol. 2024, 261, 129916. [CrossRef]
126. Oh, E.; Godoy Zúniga, M.M.; Nguyen, T.B.; Kim, B.-H.; Trung Tien, T.; Suhr, J. Sustainable Green Composite Materials in the
Next-Generation Mobility Industry: Review and Prospective. Adv. Compos. Mater. 2024, 33, 1368–1419. [CrossRef]
127. Thapliyal, D.; Verma, S.; Sen, P.; Kumar, R.; Thakur, A.; Tiwari, A.K.; Singh, D.; Verros, G.D.; Arya, R.K. Natural Fibers Composites:
Origin, Importance, Consumption Pattern, and Challenges. J. Compos. Sci. 2023, 7, 506. [CrossRef]
128. Hossain, M.T.; Shahid, M.A.; Akter, S.; Ferdous, J.; Afroz, K.; Refat, K.R.I.; Faruk, O.; Jamal, M.S.I.; Uddin, M.N.; Samad, M.A. Bin
Cellulose and Starch-Based Bioplastics: A Review of Advances and Challenges for Sustainability. Polym. Plast. Technol. Mater.
2024, 63, 1329–1349.
129. Aslam, J.; Parray, H.A. Biomimetic Coatings for Bone Regeneration. Smart Biomimetic Coatings: Design, Properties, and Biomedical
Applications; Woodhead Publishing: Sawston, UK, 2024; pp. 147–171. [CrossRef]
130. Rai, M.; Dos Santos, C.A. Biopolymer-Based Nano Films: Applications in Food Packaging and Wound Healing; Elsevier: Amsterdam,
The Netherlands, 2021; ISBN 0128233826.
131. Megha, M.; Kamaraj, M.; Nithya, T.G.; GokilaLakshmi, S.; Santhosh, P.; Balavaishnavi, B. Biodegradable Polymers Research and
Applications. Phys. Sci. Rev. 2024, 9, 949–972. [CrossRef]
132. Bozó, É.; Ervasti, H.; Halonen, N.; Shokouh, S.H.H.; Tolvanen, J.; Pitkanen, O.; Jarvinen, T.; Palvolgyi, P.S.; Szamosvolgyi, A.; Sápi,
A. Bioplastics and Carbon-Based Sustainable Materials, Components, and Devices: Toward Green Electronics. ACS Appl. Mater.
Interfaces 2021, 13, 49301–49312. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
133. Xie, D.; Zhang, R.; Song, S.; Yang, S.; Yang, A.; Zhang, C.; Song, Y. Nacre-Inspired Starch-Based Bioplastic with Excellent
Mechanical Strength and Electromagnetic Interference Shielding. Carbohydr. Polym. 2024, 331, 121888. [CrossRef]
134. Si, W.; Zhang, S. The Green Manufacturing of Thermoplastic Starch for Low-Carbon and Sustainable Energy Applications: A
Review on Its Progress. Green. Chem. 2024, 26, 1194–1222. [CrossRef]
135. Muñoz-Gimena, P.F.; Oliver-Cuenca, V.; Peponi, L.; López, D. A Review on Reinforcements and Additives in Starch-Based
Composites for Food Packaging. Polymers 2023, 15, 2972. [CrossRef]
136. Lepak-Kuc, S.; Kadziela,
˛ A.; Staniszewska, M.; Janczak, D.; Jakubowska, M.; Bednarczyk, E.; Murawski, T.; Piłczyńska, K.;
Żołek-Tryznowska, Z. Sustainable, Cytocompatible and Flexible Electronics on Potato Starch-Based Films. Sci. Rep. 2024,
14, 18838. [CrossRef]
137. Gawande, G.; Khiratkar, T.; Urkude, Y.; Bombarde, S.; Sonwane, U.; Nikhade, S.; Sanap, J. Bioplastic Production from Corn and
Potato Starch and Its Industrial Applications; Vishwakarma Institute of Technology: Maharashtra, India, 2024.
138. Kong, U.; Mohammad Rawi, N.F.; Tay, G.S. The Potential Applications of Reinforced Bioplastics in Various Industries: A Review.
Polymers 2023, 15, 2399. [CrossRef]
139. Vitola, L.; Pundiene, I.; Pranckeviciene, J.; Bajare, D. Innovative Hemp Shive-Based Bio-Composites: Part I: Modification of Potato
Starch Binder by Sodium Meta-Silicate and Glycerol. Materials 2024, 17, 4911. [CrossRef]
140. Spierling, S.; Knüpffer, E.; Behnsen, H.; Mudersbach, M.; Krieg, H.; Springer, S.; Albrecht, S.; Herrmann, C.; Endres, H.J. Bio-Based
Plastics—A Review of Environmental, Social and Economic Impact Assessments. J. Clean. Prod. 2018, 185, 476–491. [CrossRef]
141. Mastrolia, C.; Giaquinto, D.; Gatz, C.; Pervez, M.D.; Hasan, S.; Zarra, T.; Li, C.-W.; Belgiorno, V.; Naddeo, V. Plastic Pollution: Are
Bioplastics the Right Solution? Water 2022, 14, 3596. [CrossRef]
142. Lizundia, E.; Luzi, F.; Puglia, D. Organic Waste Valorisation towards Circular and Sustainable Biocomposites. Green. Chem. 2022,
24, 5429–5459. [CrossRef]
143. Mohanty, A.K.; Misra, M.; Drzal, L.T. Sustainable Bio-Composites from Renewable Resources: Opportunities and Challenges in
the Green Materials World. J. Polym. Environ. 2002, 10, 19–26. [CrossRef]
Materials 2025, 18, 1762 32 of 32

144. Hussain, A.A.; Lin, C.; Nguyen, M.K.; Ahsan, W.A.; Hussain, A.; Lin, C.; Nguyen, M.K.; Program, P.D. Biodegradation of Different
Types of Bioplastics through Composting—A Recent Trend in Green Recycling. Catalysts 2023, 13, 294. [CrossRef]
145. Igliński, B. Valorization of Bioplastic Waste: A Review on Effective Recycling Routes for the Most Widely Used Biopolymers. Int.
J. Mol. Sci. 2023, 24, 7696. [CrossRef]
146. Emadian, S.M.; Onay, T.T.; Demirel, B. Biodegradation of Bioplastics in Natural Environments. Waste Manag. 2017, 59, 526–536. [CrossRef]
147. Fonseca, A.; Ramalho, E.; Gouveia, A.; Figueiredo, F.; Nunes, J. Life Cycle Assessment of PLA Products: A Systematic Literature
Review. Sustainability 2023, 15, 12470. [CrossRef]
148. Rosenboom, J.G.; Langer, R.; Traverso, G. Bioplastics for a Circular Economy. Nat. Rev. Mater. 2022, 7, 117–137. [CrossRef]
149. PeerJ. Comprehensive Analysis of Bioplastics: Life Cycle Assessment. Waste Manag. Circ. Econ. 2024, 12, e18013.
150. Boeve, M.; de Waal, I.M. Global Plastic Pollution and the Transition Towards a Circular Economy: Lessons from the EU’s Legal
Framework on Plastics. Environ. Policy Law 2024, 53, 461–472. [CrossRef]
151. Biopolymers Market Size, Share and Growth Report. 2030. Available online: https://www.grandviewresearch.com/industry-
analysis/biopolymers-market-report (accessed on 18 February 2025).
152. Pathak, S.; Sneha, C.; Mathew, B.B. Bioplastics: Its Timeline Based Scenario & Challenges. J. Polym. Biopolym. Phys. Chem. 2014,
2, 84–90. [CrossRef]
153. Negrete-Bolagay, D.; Guerrero, V.H. Opportunities and Challenges in the Application of Bioplastics: Perspectives from Formula-
tion, Processing, and Performance. Polymers 2024, 16, 2561. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
154. Moshood, T.D.; Nawanir, G.; Mahmud, F.; Mohamad, F.; Ahmad, M.H.; AbdulGhani, A. Sustainability of Biodegradable Plastics:
New Problem or Solution to Solve the Global Plastic Pollution? Curr. Res. Green. Sustain. Chem. 2022, 5, 100273. [CrossRef]
155. Ghasemlou, M.; Barrow, C.J.; Adhikari, B. The Future of Bioplastics in Food Packaging: An Industrial Perspective. Food Packag.
Shelf Life 2024, 43, 101279. [CrossRef]
156. Lenzi, L.; Degli Esposti, M.; Braccini, S.; Siracusa, C.; Quartinello, F.; Guebitz, G.M.; Puppi, D.; Morselli, D.; Fabbri, P. Further Step
in the Transition from Conventional Plasticizers to Versatile Bioplasticizers Obtained by the Valorization of Levulinic Acid and
Glycerol. ACS Sustain. Chem. Eng. 2023, 11, 9455–9469. [CrossRef]
157. Pellis, A.; Malinconico, M.; Guarneri, A.; Gardossi, L. Renewable Polymers and Plastics: Performance beyond the Green. New
Biotechnol. 2021, 60, 146–158. [CrossRef]
158. Siddiqui, S.A.; Yang, X.; Deshmukh, R.K.; Gaikwad, K.K.; Bahmid, N.A.; Castro-Muñoz, R. Recent Advances in Reinforced
Bioplastics for Food Packaging—A Critical Review. Int. J. Biol. Macromol. 2024, 263, 130399. [CrossRef]
159. Bin Abu Sofian, A.D.A.; Lim, H.R.; Manickam, S.; Ang, W.L.; Show, P.L. Towards a Sustainable Circular Economy: Algae-Based
Bioplastics and the Role of Internet-of-Things and Machine Learning. ChemBioEng Rev. 2024, 11, 39–59. [CrossRef]

Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual
author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to
people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.