RESEARCH PLAN

a. Materials and Methods

The materials used were vinegar (4.5% acidity) as the amylopectin-breaker,

pure liquid propan-1,2,3-triol (commonly known as glycerol or glycerine) as the

plasticizer, breadfruit flesh as source of the starch, food coloring as color enhancer,

distilled water, beakers as containers, graduated cylinder in measuring the accurate

amount of liquid, grater to reduce the size of breadfruit, sinamay cloth as strainer,

blending machine, triple-beam balance in measuring weights of samples, stopwatch

in measuring the length of time intervals, stirring rods, spatula, iron stand, wire

gauge, iron ring, alcohol lamp and a mini-oven toaster as drier.

The research methodology included two parts, namely: (1) the extraction of

breadfruit starch, and (2) the making of the bioplastic out of breadfruit starch.

1. Extracting the Breadfruit Starch

The method used in extracting the breadfruit was a simple similar process

used in industries to extract starch. The same single method was utilized for all

replications without alteration. Freshly fallen breadfruits that were mature enough

(not ripe) were chosen for the purpose. Ripe breadfruits were found to hold less

starch than unripe mature ones (Udio, et.al, 2003) and breadfruits that were freshly

harvested or not yet stored for 9days have more carbohydrate (starch) substance

by 70.2% than 59.4% content after the ninth day of storage (Amusa, et.al, 2002).

The breadfruit was then washed and peeled. Defected fleshes of the fruit

were separated and discarded. A sufficient amount of the chosen flesh was grated

and measured to reach 100g on a triple-beam balance as required for each

replication. The measured flesh was then subjected to careful blending with 100-mL

water in a blending machine just enough to barely reduce a little the size of its

1

pieces. The mixture was then strained using a sinamay cloth. Another 100-mL of

water was added to the solid particles and was strained twice more. The filtrate was

drained using a beaker and was left to settle completely for a maximum of three (3)

hours. The water was decanted from the beaker leaving behind the white starch

that settled in the bottom. The starch was washed by adding 100-mL distilled water,

gently stirred and left to settle again for thirty (30) minutes. The water was

decanted leaving the starch behind. The wet starch was poured on a transparent

spot plate and left to completely dry under the sun. The time allotted for the

complete drying process was dependent on the availability of sunlight. Completely

drying the starch was necessary for the accuracy in measuring the mass needed in

making the plastic.

2. Making the Plastic

Twenty-five (25) mL of distilled water was poured into a 250-mL beaker. Two

(2) grams of breadfruit starch were added to the water and labeled as T1. Five (5)

mL of vinegar (4.5% acidity) was added to break down the branched amylopectin

into a straight chain which was necessary to enable the starch to form a plastic film.

About 2mL of propan-1,2,3-triol was also added to the treatment. The propan-1,2,3-

triol (glycerol) would make the plastic become more softer and more flexible.

Without or insufficient amount of it would make the plastic harder and stiffer but

more brittle (www.instructables.com). The mixture was heated using an alcohol

lamp and was constantly stirred. A pinch of food coloring was added into the

treatment to enhance the color of the plastic. When the mixture started to thicken

up, it was stirred even more. The mixture was carefully kept on boiling gently for

10-15 minutes until a clear and sticky substance was achieved in the sample. The

mixture was then poured onto each sheet of aluminum foil and was pushed around

to have even coverings. The mixture was dried in an oven set to 60° C (140° F) for

2

1-2 hours. After the plastic was dried, it was left to cool and was then removed from

the foil. The same procedure and measures were followed with T2 using commercial

pure corn starch instead of breadfruit starch as the control.

b. General Procedure/Treatment

There were fifteen (15) replications and two treatments for each replication,

where:

T1 – Breadfruit Starch-Based Plastic

T2 – Corn Starch-Based Plastic

Immediately, the plastic products from the two treatments were subjected to

a pull-and-measure method test using a ruler to test their tensile strength. The

plastic was held hanging beside a ruler that measured its length. The plastic was

then pulled and dragged through the millimeter calibrations of the ruler until a sign

of breakage was observed. The initial length was subtracted from the final length

both in millimeters and recorded as the measure of the tensile strength. This

method is improvised due the unavailability of a Universal Testing Machine. The

next test was on the comparison of the texture and hardness between the

breadfruit plastic and the one made out of corn starch. Ten (10) panelists were

randomly selected from Sta. Paz National High School and were allowed to rate the

plastic as to their texture and hardness based on their senses, using the scale of 1 –

5, where 1 as excellently smooth or excellently soft and 5 as very rough or very

hard (please see Appendix C on page viii). The last test conducted was the

biodegradability test wherein the samples were soaked in water for about 3 days

and were observed for signs of decomposition and disintegration. Biodegradability

test was based on the counting of the number of pieces that disintegrated from the

main body of the plastic.

3

INTRODUCTION

a. Background of the Study

One of the major problems that societies around the world are facing in this

modern era is the seemingly perpetual problem concerning on environmental

conditions. Along with the progress and all of the positive breakthroughs appear the

equally conspicuous and lingering effects to the environment that oblige us to

ponder and to reconsider. Pollution deranges the balance in nature and put the

entire biosphere in great peril. The latest environmental crisis with this concern is

the disturbing increasing rate of global warming that is being predicted by scientists

to inflict terrifying catastrophes in the future that are beyond human expectations if

the problem remains unsolved. One of the causes of this vast trouble is the

invention that man since his discovery of it has ever been using and grateful about

– plastic.

Most of the stuffs that we find beneficial in our mundane life, ranging from

simple utensils and garments to the most complex electronic devices and from

handy lenses to massive automobile bodies, are entirely or partly made up of

plastic. As more and more plastic materials are utilized, more plastic waste is

produced. Most plastics in industries and home are petroleum-based. Due to the

reason that petroleum plastics do not readily decompose, this waste contributes

considerably to environmental pollution. Since plastics are indispensable to our

modern way of life, scientists thought of some alternatives that would answer the

4

issue on the degradability of plastics. In the 1970’s, they introduced biodegradable

plastics that break down through the actions of microorganisms. Scientists also

created photodegradable plastics that break down through long exposure to

sunlight (World Book, 1992). Latest innovation to minimize, if not to eliminate, the

problem is the making of biodegradable bioplastics. According to the study

conducted by the European Bioplastics and the European Polysaccharide Network of

Excellence (EPNOE) as cited by de Guzman (2009), an estimated substitution

potential of up to 90% of the total consumption of plastics by bio-based polymers

are technically possible.

Bioplastics are chiefly obtained out of organic plant material. Some plant

starches are now known to form plastics. One of the well-known sources of

bioplastics is corn starch. Corn is converted to plastics over a series of reaction

steps which start with its starch. The end-product is a high-quality plastic called

polyactic acid, or PLA (eHow.com). Starch-based PLA is used in packaging and other

related purposes and decomposes in time, thus, not adding to the world’s plastic-

related pollution.

Since the demand for biodegradable starch-based bioplastics is accelerating,

the search for more potential plants that can become a source of this type of plastic

is also heightened. Among the plants that are known to contain significant amount

of starch is breadfruit. As cited from the study conducted by Udio, et.al (2003) on

the chemical analysis of the breadfruit, the edible pulp of the fruit has a high

content of starch along with the core and the peel that also contain certain amounts

(http://www.medwelljournals.com). Parkison (1984) as cited by Amusa, et.al (2002)

also claimed that due to the high amount of carbohydrates and starch contained in

breadfruits, it can easily replace such carbohydrate-rich fruits like banana, though

its hydrolysable carbohydrates are thought to be higher

5

(http://www.academicjournals.org). The Philippines as a tropical country is one of

the growers of this tree (Wikipedia.com). All over the country, breadfruit either

grows in the wild, domestic backyards or in plantations. Due to the massive size of

the fruit, it sometimes fall from the tree even when not ripe or over-mature because

of strong wind, weak attachment, plant disease, infestation and by other incidents

and left forsaken on the ground to rot and be wasted.

The aim to help the problem on pollution brought by the use of petroleum-

based plastics by producing another starch-based bioplastic from breadfruit that is

significantly biodegradable and is comparable with the proven corn-starch-based

plastic, and to provide an alternative utilization of fallen breadfruit that is destined

to be wasted by testing its feasibility as a component of bioplastics moved the

researchers to conduct this study.

b. Statement of the Problem

1. General Objective

This study was conducted in order to establish the feasibility of starch

extracted from breadfruit as a component of bioplastics.

2. Specific Objectives

This study was aimed to:

2.1. produce a biodegradable bioplastic out of breadfruit starch, and;

2.2. compare the bioplastic made out of breadfruit starch with the

bioplastic

produced by corn starch in terms of:

i. tensile strength

ii. biodegradability

iii. texture

iv. hardness

6

c. Significance of the Study

The result of this study is hoped to provide information regarding on the

possibility of breadfruit starch bioplastics and to pave another way for the massive

production of plastics that are more environment-friendly which would help aid the

worsening problem on pollution caused by nonbiodegradable plastics.

The beneficiaries of this study are the growers of breadfruit trees as this is

also hoped to provide them an idea on how to make use of their fallen and rejected

breadfruits. Likewise, this study will also be beneficial for environmentalists and

bioplastic manufacturers as this will offer them an idea about another possible

source of biodegradable bioplastic that will be helpful in their advocacy against

plastic-pollution.

d. Scope and Limitations

The study was conducted from January to August 2010 at Pasanon, San

Francisco, Southern Leyte, the barangay where Sta. Paz National High School is

located. The reasons for the choice of the experimental site were as follows: (1) it is

practically the nearest place where the researchers could conduct the study; (2) it is

the nearest source of materials and equipments that were used in the research and;

(3) the place could guarantee peace, order and convenience for the smooth flow of

the study.

This study focused on the production of a bioplastic out of breadfruit starch

using a conventional method employed in producing other bioplastics like corn and

potato plastics, testing only the product’s tensile strength using an improvised

simple pull-and-measure method with the aid of a ruler, the biodegradability in

water which was good for a 3-day observation only and the comparisons in texture

7

and hardness which were done by survey; all in comparison with corn bioplastic as

the control treatment.

This study would be broader and more distinct if it included the test in ability

to carry water and weight, tensile and bending strength of the plastic using the

Universal Testing Machine, chemical-analysis comparison and molding the plastics.

However, to achieve all these means more money, time, efforts and sophisticated

machinery which the researchers could not afford.

e. Review of Related Literature

Plastics come from the by-products of the processing of crude oil for which

the fossils formed by the anaerobic decomposition of buried dead organisms are the

raw materials. These are non-renewable sources that will ultimately run out of

supply. The manufacture of plastics uses large amounts of energy and resources

and generates toxic emissions and pollutants that contribute to global warming. The

very durability of plastics causes environmentalists to be concerned about its safe

disposal. Some plastics can take between 500 and 1,000 years to break down

completely. Plastics are non-biodegradable – that is, it does not undergo bacterial

decomposition. Discarded thin-plastic carry-bags cause unsightly clogged drains,

create litter, hurt marine life, and choke animals that eat them. Strewn across

fields, they block plant growth and prevent rainwater absorption by soil (Shankari,

8

2010). According to the U.S. EPA, 70% more global warming gases are emitted by

making bags from plastic bags (http://www.globalwarmingdayofaction.org/).

According to the Greenpeace organization

(2006) (http://www.greenpeace.org), following the arrival of the Greenpeace ship

M.Y. Esperanza in Manila as part of the group's global expedition to defend the

oceans, Philippines is one the countries that is having a problem on plastic pollution.

The ship’s crew and volunteers from Greenpeace and the Eco-Waste Coalition

collected approximately four cubic meters of plastic trash from Manila Bay onboard

inflatable boats, as part of a waste survey and documentation to monitor the extent

of plastic pollution in Manila’s famous coastline. Manila Bay is considered one of the

most polluted bays in Asia, and plastics comprise most of the floating litter on its

surface. New technology and product now can solve this

dilemma with bioplastic. Bioplastic is a form of plastic derived from renewable

biomass sources, such as vegetable oil, corn starch, pea starch, or microbiota,

rather than fossil-fuel plastics which are derived from nonrenewable resources like

petroleum. Most, but not all, bioplastics are designed to biodegrade. However,

starch-based bioplastics are often biodegradable (www.wikipedia.com).

A new study from Ceresana Research (2009) analyzes the

market for biodegradable polymers. Results showed that the expectations for

bioplastics are high: a better image for plastics, independence from petroleum

products, solutions for waste problems, contribution to environmental protection, as

well as new source of income for the agricultural sector . Another related market

case study entitled “Bioplastics Market Worldwide 2007 – 2025” projected that

bioplastics has the potential to reduce the petroleum consumption for plastic by 15

to 20 percent in 2025. Moreover, the study predicted that bioplastics fast market

growth of more than 8-10% per year will increase its market share up to 25-30% by

9

2020 (www.hkc22.com). According to Towner (2008), the demand for

corn bioplastic or PLA (polylactic acid) is increasing rapidly. Corn (Zea mays) is rich

in starch and has been used as a material for plastic-making. He researched and

compiled a list of the pros and cons of the corn bioplastic. According to his list,

among the favorable ideas concerning on corn-based plastic are that corn starch is

a renewable resource, the plastic is biodegradable, does not emit toxic fumes when

incinerated, does not leech chemicals into food or soil and inexpensive. Among the

negative ideas about corn plastic that Towner presented are that the plastic is not

recyclable, hard to compost in large scales and typically diverting corn from the

world’s food supply. Yet, Towner concluded that the drawbacks of using corn

bioplastic cannot surpass the advantages in using it. It is a must then the quest for

more potential resources for bioplastics should be made more extensive.

Breadfruit is Artocarpus altilis which belongs to the family of mulberries

(Morus) and figs (Ficus or baletes). In the green stage, the fruit is hard and the

interior is white, starchy and somewhat fibrous. When fully ripe, the fruit is

somewhat soft, the interior is cream colored or yellow and pasty, also sweetly

fragrant. The seeds are irregularly oval, rounded at one end, pointed at the other,

about 3/4 in (2 cm) long, dull-brown with darker stripes. In the center of seedless

fruits there is a cylindrical or oblong core, in some types covered with hairs bearing

flat, brown, abortive seeds about 1/8 in (3 mm) long. The fruit is borne singly or in

clusters of 2 or 3 at the branch tips. The fruit stalk (pedicel) varies from 1 to 5 in

(2.5-12.5 cm) long (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Breadfruit). Breadfruit is a staple food in

many tropical regions. In the Philippines, breadfruit is eaten once cooked or further

processed into a variety of other foods. Its composition is roughly 25%

carbohydrates (known to be rich in starch) and 70% water. As a starchy fruit,

10

breadfruit could be a potential resource for bioplastic just like corn, pea, potato and

cassava starches which are the recently studied material for the said purpose. A

study performed by Akanbi, T.O., Nazamid, S. and Adebowale, A.A. (2009) of the

Faculty of Food Science and Technology of University Putra Malaysia in coordination

with the University of Agriculture, Abeokuta, Ogun State, Nigeria entitled

“Functional and Pasting Properties of a Tropical Breadfruit (Artocarpus altilis) Starch

isolated a starch from matured breadfruit and analyzed its moisture, crude protein,

fat, amylase, amylopectin and ash contents along with the average particle size,

pH, bulk density and dispersibility of the breadfruit starch. The research concluded

that breadfruit starch has an array of functional, pasting and proximate properties

that can facilitate its use in so many areas where the properties of other starches

are acceptable (http://www.ifrj.upm.edu.my).

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

After the conduct of the experiments, data were obtained showing the

results.

One hundred (100) grams of grated breadfruit flesh were utilized in every

replication. The average starch amount yielded in every 100g breadfruit flesh for

the 15 replications was about more or less 7 grams (0.07%) which is lesser than the

11

percentage yield of 14.26% according to the study conducted on the analysis of

breadfruit properties by Akanbi, et.al (2009) using Nigerian breadfruit (Artocarpus

altilis). Howeve,r Rahman et.al (1999) as cited by Akanbi et.al (2009) reasoned that

variations in the starch content of breadfruit may depend on the maturity stage,

variety and different climatic and agronomic conditions. Our Philippine breadfruit

may have relatively lesser starch content than Nigerian grown breadfruits.

A new bioplastic was produced by using the breadfruit starch which was

significantly different in texture but no significant difference in terms of hardness

with corn-based plastic produced in the same experiment. Breadfruit plastic was

also proved to be very biodegradable. However, the new plastic was found to be

lesser in tensile strength compared with the corn plastic.

Table 1 shows the comparison between the tensile strength of the breadfruit

plastic and the corn plastic using the method described.

Table 1

Comparison of Biodegradable Bioplastic Made of Breadfruit Starch and Made of Corn Starch in Terms of Tensile Strength (in millimeters)

Treatment Mean Standard

Deviation

t-testp-value

Level of Significanc

e

Interpretati

on

Breadfruit Starch-Based Plastic

6.7 1.9

0.00 0.05 SignificantCorn Starch-Based Plastic

15.9 2.0

Note: If p-value level of significance, then the test is significant.

Based on the data presented in the table, the standard deviation and the

mean tensile strength measured in millimeters of the corn starch-based plastic were

relatively higher compared with that of breadfruit starch-based plastic. Likewise,

using t-test as the statistical tool, the p-value of 0.00 was less than the given level

of significance of 0.05 which rendered the test results for both treatments to be

significantly different from each other in terms of tensile strength. The plastic made

12

out of corn starch is greater in tensile strength compared to breadfruit plastic. This

means that the bioplastic made out of breadfruit starch is less flexible and would

break more easily than the corn plastic. This result could be attributed to some

known factors. Rincon et.al (2004), as cited by Akanbi et.al (2009), found that the

amylose content of breadfruit starch is low. Starch is made up of two polymers,

namely amylose which is straight chained and amylopectin which is branched.

Straight-chained polymers like the amylose is needed in the formation of the plastic

film while the branched amylopectin which inhibits the formation of the film had to

be broken down by the action of an acid as done in the procedure using vinegar

(acetic acid) (www.instructables.com). A lesser amylose content could mean a

lesser chance with the propan-1,2,3-triol to bind with that polymer to form a more

flexible film. The result could be a plastic with lesser tensile strength. Fabunmi et.al

(2007) wrote that most starch-based composites exhibit poor material properties

such as tensile strength, yield strength, and stiffness and elongation at break

(http://www.asabe.org). Corn as a proven source of PLA (polyactic acid) plastic may

have more amylose content than breadfruit. Other reasons could be the presence of

some suspected impurities present in the breadfruit starches that were extracted

for the experiment that could have lessened the action of propan-1,2,3-triol in

making the product more flexible and high in tensile strength.

On the other hand, Table 2 revealed the comparison between the

biodegradability of breadfruit plastic and corn plastic in water for 3 days.

Table 2

Comparison of Biodegradable Bioplastic Made of Breadfruit Starch and Made of Corn Starch in Terms of Biodegradability as Measured by the

Number of Disintegrated Pieces Day Treatme

nt

Mean Standard

Deviatio

t-testp-value

Level of Significan

ce

Interpretati

13

n on

Day 1 T1 2.7 1.1

0.02 0.05 SignificantT2 1.7 0.9

Day 2 T1 7.2 2.3

0.00 0.05 SignificantT2 3.5 0.9

Day 3 T1 22.4 4.3

0.00 0.05 SignificantT2 5.7 1.5

Legend: T1 - Breadfruit Starch-Based PlasticT2 - Corn Starch-Based Plastic

Note: If p-value level of significance, then the test is significant.

As observed in Table 2, the mean and standard deviation of the number of

disintegrated pieces were reflected. For three days, the mean number of

disintegrated pieces for breadfruit starch-based plastic was substantially higher

than the corn starch-based plastic. Moreover, it can be seen that the t-test p-values

of 0.02, 0.00 and 0.00 were less than the 0.05 level of significance which means

that the test is significant. This means that the two treatments significantly differ in

terms of the number of disintegrated pieces for three days. This implies that the

breadfruit starch-based plastic is more biodegradable than the corn starch-based

plastic.

The higher biodegradability of the breadfruit plastic could be pointed out

from its high hydration rate caused by its high swelling power. The breadfruit starch

has a high swelling power and this has been reported to be due to its lower degree

of intermolecular association (Tien et.al, 1991 as cited by Akanbi et.al, 2009).

Similarly, the findings of Wootton et.al (2004) stated that the swelling power of

breadfruit has been related to the associative binding within the starch granules

and apparently, the strength and character of the micellar network is related to the

amylose content of the starch, low amylose content, produces high swelling power.

14

As a result of swelling, there is an increment in the solubility of the starch and the

rate of being hydrolyzed is increased. Hydrolysis is a type of chemical reaction in

which a molecule of water reacts with another molecule, thus splitting it. This could

explain why breadfruit plastic was very biodegradable in water.

Table 3 shows the comparison of the two treatments in terms of texture.

Table 3

Comparison of Biodegradable Bioplastic Made of Breadfruit Starch and Made of Corn Starch in Terms of Texture

Treatme

nt

Frequency Kolmogorov-Smirnovp-value

Level of Significan

ce

Interpretati

onVery

Satisfactorily Smooth

Satisfactorily Smooth

T1 3 7

0.02 0.05 Significant T2 10 0

Legend: T1 - Breadfruit Starch-Based PlasticT2 - Corn Starch-Based Plastic

Note: If p-value level of significance, then the test is significant.

Table 3 shows the most frequent criteria that occurred during the survey for

the comparison of the two bioplastics for texture. Breadfruit plastic (T1) was judged

generally as satisfactorily smooth with a frequency computation of 7 than corn

plastic (T2) with a 0 frequency computation. On the other hand, corn plastic was

evaluated as very satisfactorily smooth by most panelists with a frequency

computation of a complete 10 than breadfruit plastic which has only 3. Using

Kolmogorov-Smirnov as the statistical tool, the p-value of 0.02 was less than the

level of significance interpreting the test results between the two treatments as

significantly different from each other. This means that corn starch-based plastic is

significantly smoother than the breadfruit starch-based plastic. The lessened action

of propan-1,2,3-triol to the amylose-low breadfruit starch could have caused a

relatively lesser smoothness of the breadfruit plastic.

15

Table 4

Comparison of Biodegradable Bioplastic Made of Breadfruit Starch and Made of Corn Starch in Terms of Hardness

Treatme

nt

Frequency Kolmogorov-Smirnovp-value

Level of Significan

ce

Interpretati

onVery

Satisfactorily Soft

Satisfactorily Soft

T1 8 2

0.99 0.05 Not

Significant

T2 10 0

Legend: T1 - Breadfruit Starch-Based PlasticT2 - Corn Starch-Based Plastic

Note: If p-value > level of significance, then the test is not significant.

As stated in the table, breadfruit plastic was generally regarded as very

satisfactorily soft with a frequency computation of 8 out of 10, while corn plastic

again was regarded as very satisfactorily soft by a frequency calculation of perfect

10. However, the statistical p-value of 0.99 by Kolmogorov-Smirnov test is higher

than the 0.05 level of significance which tells us that there is no significant

difference between the softness of the breadfruit plastic and of the corn plastic. This

lead to the account that breadfruit plastic is very satisfactorily soft similar to the

plastic made out of commercial corn starch. The similar softness of both plastics

could be attributed to the characteristics of most purely starch-based bioplastics to

be soft. Moreover, both used propan-1,2,3-triol or glycerol that usually makes the

plastic soft and flexible (www.instructables.com).

16

CONCLUSION

The following conclusions are drawn based on the results presented:

1. Biodegradable bioplastic can be produced by using breadfruit starch.

2. The breadfruit starch-based plastic is significantly more biodegradable in

water than the corn starch-based plastic.

3. Breadfruit plastic has a significantly lower tensile strength than the plastic

made from commercial pure corn starch.

4. The breadfruit plastic is significantly less smooth than the corn plastic.

5. There is no significant difference between the softness of bioplastic made out

of breadfruit starch and bioplastic made out of commercial corn starch.

17

RECOMMENDATION

Based on the conclusions drawn, the following recommendations are hereby

offered:

1. Starch produced by fallen breadfruit is recommended as a possible and

efficient component in making biodegradable bioplastics.

2. Further study and more reliable tests for the enhancement the quality of the

breadfruit plastic in comparison with other bioplastics and petroleum-based

plastics is suggested to establish more the reliability and credibility of

breadfruit starch as a component of biodegradable bioplastics.

3. Scientific inquiries towards improving the properties of this promising

breadfruit starch-based bioplastic through starch modification, processing

conditions and the addition of chemical reinforcements to realize a new

marketable renewable and biodegradable substitute for the conventional

petroleum-based plastics are highly proposed.

4. An extended supplementary study on, “Effectivity of the Combined

Breadfruit, Cassava and Corn Starches as Components of Bioplastic”, is

recommended.

18

BIBLIOGRAPHY

General Reference

The World Book Encyclopedia (Vol. 15), World Book Inc., pages 558-565,

C.1992

Periodicals

The Feasibility of Polystyrene-coated Paper as a Substitute for Packaging, Bato Balani: For Science and Technology III (Vol.14 No. 3) 1994-1995, p. 16-18

Electronic Resources

Akanbi, T.O. et.al, Functional and Pasting Properties of a Tropical Breadfruit (Artocarpus altilis) Starch, International Food Research Journal, Vol. 16, pages 151-157, Nigeria, 2009 Retrieved from: http://www.ifrj.upm.edu.my

Amusa, N.A., Kehinde, I.A. and Ashaye, O.A., Bio-deterioration of Breadfruit (Artocarpus communis) in Storage and Its Effect on the Nutrient Composition , Nigeria, 2002

Retrieved from: http://www.academicjournals.org/AJB/manuscripts/

Diputra, Rangga C., Bioplastic Role in Reducing Environmental Pollution, 2010,

Retrieved from: http://global-warm-ing.co.ccl/bioplastic/

Fabunmi, Olayide O. et.al, Developing Biodegradable Plastics from Starch, 2007

Retrieved from: http://www.asabe.org

Shankari, Uma. Environmental Cocerns: Pros and Cons of Plastics, 2010Retrieved from: http://socyberty.com/issues/

Udio, Akpobome J. et.al, Chemical Analysis of Breadfruit (Artocarpus communis forst) from South-Western Nigeria, Journal of Food Technology, Vol. 1, Issue No. 2, 2003, pg. no. 29-35

Retrieved from: http://www.medwelljournals.com/abstract/

Towner, James, What are the Benefits of Corn-Based Plastic?, 2008

19

Retrieved from: http://azsustainability.com

About Plastic Pollution, Retrieved from: http://members.rediff.com/jogsn/BP4.htm

Bioplastics, Retrieved from: http://wikipedia.com/bioplastics

Bioplastics Market Worldwide 2007-2025, Retrieved from: http://www.hkc22.com/

Breadfruit, Retrieved from: http://wkipedia.com/breadfruit

Green Report: Bioplastic Industry Emerges, 2010, Retrieved from: http://socyberty.com/issues/

How to Make Corn-Based Plastic, Retrieved from: www.eHow.com

Make Potato Plastic, Retrieved from: http://www.instructables.com/id/Starch_Plastic

Waste Survey Exposes Extent of Plastic Pollution in Manila Bay, August 16,2006 Retrieved from: http://www.greenpeace.org/seasia

20

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

The researcher would like to extend her heartfelt thanks and profound

gratitude to the following persons who in a way or another had helped made this

research a successful one.

To Mr. Denijun Alvar, my Science Investigatory Project Adviser, for the

supervision, guidance and assistance he had extended to the research, and for the

valuable suggestions and critiques in improving the author’s works.

To Mrs. Teresita Ortiz, as a Science Investigatory Project Auxiliary Adviser, for

assistance and supervision given whenever the adviser is not around.

To Mr. Salvador Artigo Jr. for the allotment of part of school’s fund for the

financial assistance of the research, and for the encouragements in finishing the

work.

To Mrs. Carmelita Maturan, for her kindness in providing me a mini-oven

toaster that was very valuable in the conduct of the study.

To Mrs. Vita Dagami, for her thoughtfulness in lending me her digital camera

for the documentation of the experiments.

To the panelists, good people who willfully contributed breadfruit for the

experiment and to those who are not named yet had given me support and aided

me in my research needs.

21

Above all, I thank the Divine Providence for offering all of us His undying

generosity, wisdom and guidance.

Thank you so much!

THE RESEARCHER

22