270
Views
10
CrossRef citations to date
0
Altmetric
Original Articles

Comparison of the wood bonding performance of water- and alkali-soluble cottonseed protein fractions

ORCID Icon, ORCID Icon & ORCID Icon
Pages 1500-1517 | Received 30 Jun 2020, Accepted 11 Nov 2020, Published online: 24 Nov 2020
 

Abstract

The interests in biobased wood adhesives have been steadily increasing in recent years. Cottonseed protein isolate has shown potential as a renewable biobased adhesives. For a better understanding of the adhesive performance and mechanisms of cottonseed protein, we sequentially separated the isolated material into water-soluble (CSPw) and alkali-soluble (CSPa) fractions. The adhesive properties of both fractions on bonding maple wood veneers were tested at their natural pH (4.0 for CSPw and 7.0 for CSPa) and a common pH 11.0. The dry, wet, and soaked (i.e. wet and then re-dried) strength at break of the wood pairs bonded by CSPa were always higher than the values found for CSPw under the same conditions. Per the solubility and rheological analysis, the observed differences in bonding performance could be attributed to the fact that CSPw is more hydrophilic and lower in pI. ATR FTIR analysis was directly applied to the adhesive-coated surface area of maple strips cohesively broken by shear tests. Qualitative FTIR spectral features and quantitative contact angle measurement of the adhesive-coated maple surface evidenced the better wettability of cured CSPa than CSPw adhesives. Lesscarbohydrates leached out of CSPa during water soaking relative to CSPw. These observations increased the mechanistic knowledge of seed protein products functioning as wood adhesives, and would be helpful for the design and tuning of their future functional performance in green applications.

Acknowledgment

The authors thank Kaylin Kilgore for her technic help on the adhesive strength analysis. Mention of trade names or commercial products in this publication is solely for the purpose of providing specific information and does not imply recommendation or endorsement by USDA-Agricultural Research Service. USDA is an equal opportunity employer.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

Reprints and Corporate Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

To request a reprint or corporate permissions for this article, please click on the relevant link below:

Academic Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

Obtain permissions instantly via Rightslink by clicking on the button below:

If you are unable to obtain permissions via Rightslink, please complete and submit this Permissions form. For more information, please visit our Permissions help page.