Chapter 6
Food Packaging Technologies
John Brockgreitens and Abdennour Abbas
John Brockgreitens, 2004 Folwell Hall, Falcon Heights, MN 55108, Phone: 612-626-7501,
Email: brock240@[Link]
Abdennour Abbas,Department of Bioproducts and Biosystems Engineering, University of
Minnesota Twin Cities, MN, 55108-6005, USA, Email: aabbas@[Link], Tel.: +1 (612) 624-
4292, Email: aabbas@[Link]
1. INTRODUCTION
Principally, food packaging is designed to contain food products and maintain food quality. The
functions of packaging have been consolidated into four categories: containment, protection,
communication, and convenience [33]. Containment is simply providing a vessel to store and
transport food. Protection takes containment further in that it provides a sealed space that
attempts to minimize food exposure to the environment. With the advent of printing, food
packaging emerged as a medium to communicate product information (nutritional facts,
ingredient lists, etc.) and marketing. Finally, convenience is concerned with the ease of using the
packaging (portability, sealing, etc.).In this chapter we will discuss the fundamentals of food
packaging and introduce the concept of “smart” packaging systems that provide additional
functionality to traditional packaging.
2. MATERIALS SCIENCE AND FOOD PACKAGING
In order to determine the properties of a food package one must first consider the
materials that make up the package. Materials science combines physics, chemistry, engineering,
and mathematics to understand and control material properties such as strength, composition, and
conductivity [3]. The materials most commonly found in food packaging include
paper/paperboard, polyethylene terephthalate plastic (PET), glass, tin, and other metals [27].
These materials are ideal for packaging in that they are cheap, widely available, and have
favorable properties for packaging. As stated previously, the primary purpose of food packaging
is to provide a barrier between food and threats from the outside environment. Figure 1 (adapted
from [33] and [24]) shows an overview of the types of interactions that occur in packaging
systems. As seen in Figure 1, a great deal of interaction can occur between food packaging and
the environment. Water vapor, light, and external aromas can diffuse into food through the
packaging material. This transfer can negatively impact food as it leads to dehydration, texture
changes, and flavor/aroma loss. Additionally, gasses produced by microbes present in the food
product (respiration) can diffuse out of the package. Finally, interactions with the packaging
material itself are possible. In extreme cases, materials present in the package material can leach
out into food products. A popular example is the plasticizer Bisphenol A (BPA) which was used
in plastic beverage containers and has been linked to endocrine disruption and birth defects[34].
Both of these interactions can be modeled mathematically. First, the behavior of gasses can be
modeled using the Ideal Gas Law.
𝑝𝑉 = 𝑛𝑅𝑇 (1)
Where, p is the pressure in atm, V is the volume of the gas in L, n is the number of moles of the
gas, R is the gas constant = 0.082057 [Link]/mol.K, and T is the temperature of the gas in Kelvin.
FIGURE 1. Overview of chemical interactions that occur through packaging material.
This law outlines external forcesthat drive the kinetic activity of theoretical ideal gasses
that only interact with each other elastically. Gasses that are involved with packaging, however,
are often not under ideal conditions and have to contend with the material that compromises the
package. The kinetic interaction between two or more different molecules is known as diffusion.
Material properties like permeability and chemical composition play important roles in food
packaging. More permeable materials will allow greater transfer of gasses, food aromas, and
water between the food and the [Link] composition of packaging material is also
a very important consideration as some materials and chemicals can impact the taste or texture of
a food product. Mass transfer between the package and outside environment can be modeled
using Fick’s Law of Diffusion:
∆𝑐
𝐽 = −𝐷 ∆𝑥 (2)
Where, J is the transport rate (flux) per unit area of permeant, c is the concentration of permeant,
D is the diffusion coefficient, and ∆c/∆x is the concentration gradient of the permeant over a
certain thickness (∆x).
Maximizing the properties of materials to limit light, vapor, odor, and water transfer into
packaging has been the traditional focus of food package research. As materials technology has
developed, food packaging has become more adept at accomplishing these primary functions and
additional functionalities have been added to food packaging. This wave of advanced “smart”
packaging has become popular both on the market and in research.
3. SMART PACKAGING
As the food packaging industry continues to evolve, new functionalities are being added. Smart
packaging is defined as any packaging system that provides a specific service beyond the role of
physical barrier between the food product and the outside environment [4,6].This term is very
broad and is often broken down into different categories as shown in Figure 1. In the greater
realm of smart packaging the term intelligent packaging is used to describe any packaging
system that conveys information to the consumer about the enclosed product [37,40].Within the
industry, the terms smart and intelligent packaging are often used interchangeably, and there is
much debate about their definitions [37]. To alleviate confusion surrounding these terms, the term
responsive has been borrowed from the materials science field. Responsive packaging systems
incorporate “stimuli-responsive” materials that react with heat, light, or a variety of chemical and
biological triggers. Once a stimulus is applied, responsive materials (polymers, particles, surfaces,
gels, etc.) change in shape, size, color, chemical functionality, or chemical structure [1,5,36].
Researchers take advantage of these predictable, tunable changes to make sensors and chemical
release systems. Responsive systems can be either informative, corrective, or both. Informative
responsive packaging incorporates a material that gives off a detectable signal in response to a
specific analyte (or target). This term is most akin to the traditional term intelligent packaging
(packaging that provides detailed information on the product), but lessens the confusion between
the synonyms “smart” and “intelligent.”
The other form of smart food packaging is active packaging. Active packaging systems
directly interact with enclosed food products and alter food quality properties [8,23]. This
definition is widely accepted in the industry and research in active packaging has grown
substantially over the past two decades. Unlike responsive packaging, active systems are not
triggered by specific target molecules. The third type of smart packaging system is design-based
smart packaging. These packaging systems provide higher functionality based on their design.
Examples include re-sealable packages or “easy-open” lids. We will not focus on design-based
smart packaging but rather on advanced materials and their uses in active and responsive
packaging systems.
Active and responsive packaging technologies are very important, advancing fields given
their impacts on food safety. Putting sensors directly into food packaging supplies information
directly to the consumerand prevents consumption of compromised food which in turn lowers the
occurrence of foodborne illness. This consideration is important because food processing
companies often have no way to ensure the quality of the products they sell once the food leaves
the factory. Food packaging is designed first and foremost with food safety in mind. The United
States Center for Disease Control and Prevention estimated that 1 in 6 Americans (approximately
48 million people) get sick and nearly 3,000 people die each year from foodborne illnesses [17].
These illnesses are caused by a variety of biological pathogens (Salmonella, Listeria, Norovirus,
etc.) and the most commonly reported illness is acute gastroenteritis. Active and responsive
packaging systems have emerged to combat the growth and spread of these pathogens and other
non-pathogenic spoilage organisms.
3.1. Active Packaging
Active packaging systems are used to improve food quality by incorporating materials or
chemicals that directly interact with food products. This type of packaging has gained a lot of
research attention due to recent advances in nanotechnology and materials science. Common
techniques employed in active packaging include modified atmosphere conditions, antimicrobial
films, and gas scavenging compounds.
Modified Atmosphere Packaging
Modified atmosphere packaging (MAP) introduces a controlled amount of gasses into the sealed
environment of a packaging. This type of packaging is commonly used for sealed meat products
and gasses like carbon dioxide and nitrogen are used. These gasses create an inhospitable
environment for microbes like bacteria and fungi as they alter cell membranes, inhibit enzymatic
activity, and block microbial nutrient transfer [35]. This type of active packaging is the most
prevalent due to the fact that it does not require any advanced methods or technologies.
Gas Scavengers
Gas scavengers remove gasses that degrade food quality as they build up in sealed packaging
environments (Fig. 2). Oxygen, for example, causes browning of meats and facilitates the growth
of aerobic bacteria. In produce, ethylene acts as a ripening agent. In order to mitigate the impacts
of these gasses and others, gas scavengers have been incorporated into packaging systems [38].
Common oxygen absorbing materials in food packaging include titanium dioxide, iron
composites, and natural antioxidants [15]. One common example is oxygen absorbing packets
found in packaged cured meat products.
FIGURE 2. Overview of active food packaging interactions.
Antimicrobial Packaging
In order to combat the growth of both bacteria and fungi in food products, antimicrobial
compounds can be embedded into packaging films or dispersed into food using a sachet.
Compounds that directly interact with biological molecules (bacteria, fungi, etc.) are commonly
referred to as bioactive [7]. Two major obstacles to this type of active packaging are the
economic viability of antimicrobial systems and safety concerns related to the use of
antimicrobials [20].
3.2. Responsive Packaging
Responsive packaging systems incorporate triggering mechanisms. These triggers, based on
stimuli responsive polymers, can be engineered to respond to specific stimuli like foodborne
contaminants, spoilage microbes, pH, and temperature. Similar to active packaging; responsive
systems that interact with biological molecules are known as bioresponsive [16]. This distinction
is important for food packaging due to the fact that the majority of foodborne threats are either
fungal or bacterial. Figure 3 below shows a schematic of a responsive packaging system.
Triggering agents diffuse and come into contact with the responsive material which in turn either
gives off a signal (Informative Agent) and/ or releases compounds to combat the threat
(Corrective Agent).
FIGURE 3. Hierarchy of smart packaging terminology.
FIGURE 4. Schematic of responsive food packaging: Foodborne or external threats diffuse and
interact with the responsive material yielding a detectable signal or release of corrective
compounds.
Stimuli-Responsive Materials
Stimuli-responsive materials change physical or chemical properties in response to external
stimuli including temperature, pH, light, biological molecules, and more (Fig. 4). These materials
can exist in the form of nanoparticles, gels, and layered films [5]. Common triggered reactions
include assembly, collapse, shrinking, swelling, and change in chemical [Link] the
last decade, research in these materials has boomed due their applicability in the biomedical
industry [1]. Some of these materials have been utilized in food packaging and provided a
foundation for a variety of responsive packaging systems.
Informative Responsive Packaging
The major advantage that responsive packaging systems have over active systems is their ability
to detect specific foodborne or external threats. This detection is accomplished through specific
chemical modifications of stimuli-responsive materials. Signals can be color changes visible to
the naked eye, changes in electronic properties measured by scanners, and a variety of other
[Link] of informative responsive packaging systems include time-temperature
indicators (TTIs) and radio frequency identification (RFID) tags [9,21-22].
Time-temperature indicators have become common on packaged meat and dairy
products. These color changing sensors indicate if a food product has been exposed to high
temperatures (temperatures favorable for microbial growth) during transport. The indicator also
registers the amount of time that the product was exposed to the high temperature.
Radio frequency identification tags (RFID) have emerged as a popular option for
informative responsive packaging systems. RFID tags are printed electronic stickers that have
come to replace barcodes on my products due to the fact that they can store more information and
information can even be added to [Link] barcodes, they are read with simple scanners can
provide information concerning shipping, handling, product origin, and more. RFIDs have yet to
be incorporated into food packaging at a large scale, but recent developments have made these
technologies cheaper and practical for food packaging applications. In addition to providing
unique, modifiable information for a specific packaged product, RFIDs have recently been
functionalized with food analyte sensors. By combining RFID tags with sensors, these labels can
not only provide up to date information on the food package through the supply chain, but can
also report on the quality of the food within the package [9,13]. Use of RFIDs in food packaging
is expected to increase drastically as the costs associated with the tags decrease.
Corrective Responsive Packaging
Corrective responsive packaging systems utilize physical changes in stimuli-responsive materials.
These systems act as compound laden “sponges” that shrink or swell when triggered and release
their payloads into the food. This type of responsive technology is mainly used in the biomedical
field for drug delivery systems. However, recent research has utilized these technologies for food
packaging systems [14].
4. RECENT TECHNOLOGICAL ADVANCES IN FOOD PACKAGING
Other significant advances in materials science, specifically nanotechnology, have had major
impacts on the food packaging [Link] advances are far reaching and can potentially have
major impacts in smart packaging in particular.
Nanocomposites
Nanocomposites are made up of base materials (metals, polymers, etc.) with nanomaterials
dispersed within them. Nanomaterials are defined as materials that have at least one dimension in
the nanoscale (10 -9 m) and exist in many forms including films, particles, and fibers [11].
Nanomaterials can be added to current food packaging systems to improve structural and
containment properties (improved protection from vapor and light diffusion). Food packaging
nanotechnology can also act as an active agent. Silver nanoparticles, for example, are effective
antimicrobial agents and use of these particles in food packaging has been explored[2,10].
Bio-based Materials
Other popular advances in food packaging are focused on the source of the packaging material.
Recent global concerns with sustainability, persistent plastic pollution, and reliance on non-
renewable materials have fueled research and development for renewable packaging materials
that can mimic current packaging materials [39]. To answer this challenge, packaging systems are
being designed from bio-based, biodegradable, and/or compostable materials. Bio-based
materials are simply derived from renewable, biological sources. These materials include bio-
based plastics, edible films based on food materials, and paper products [12,28,29].Smart food
packaging technologies are no different and a great deal of research has been dedicated to
functional, renewable packaging materials. Two technologies are at the forefront of this new
wave of research: smart edible materials and bio-nanocomposites.
Smart edible materials are derived from food materials like proteins, lipids, and oils and
possess higher functionalities like antimicrobial properties. Common materials include casein or
whey protein films dosed with edible antimicrobials like cinnamon oil [18-19,32]. Production of
these materials is currently limited due to their poor barrier properties and stability.
Bionanocomposites
These are nanocomposites where the base material is derived from a renewable, biological source
[31]. Common base materials include bioplastics like polylactic acid and thermoplastic starch
[30]. These materials can then combined with bio-based nanomaterials like chitosan,
nanocrystalline cellulose, and carbon nanomaterials to produce biologically renewable
composites. Bionanocomposite food packaging is still in its infancy as more research is needed to
fully optimize the material properties, production methods, and disposal methods of these
materials.
5. THE MARKET FOR SMART FOOD PACKAGING
The market for food packaging is expected to grow to over $300 billion by 2019 [25]. Smart
packaging is a small fraction of the this total with an estimated value of $23 billion [26]. This
market is expected to grow to a value of $39.7 billion by 2020 as new materials and technologies
become more industrially feasible. Currently, the smart packaging market is dominated by
modified atmosphere packaging and time-temperature indicators. Another major contributing
factor is that smart packaging systems are also used for medical products like vaccines and
medications that must be monitored and controlled much like food products. This market will
also see an increase as more major companies produce smart packaging products. Companies that
currently produce smart packaging products include 3M (U.S), BASF SE (Germany), and
International Paper (U.S).
6. CHALLENGES AND PERSPECTIVES TO SMART FOOD PACKAGING
The adoption of smart food packaging technologies faces many challenges namely production,
safety and health, and efficiency.
Production
Food packaging systems are based on many simple, cheap materials like paper and polyethylene
plastic. If smart food packaging is to be fully adopted by the industry, new technologies must be
economically feasible. In order to achieve this feasibility, the packaging must be produced with
minimal changes to existing production methods. Additionally, the source materials for these
smart packages (antimicrobials, responsive materials, etc.) must be produced in a cost effective
manner.
Safety
Incorporating responsive materials into food packaging systems presents new threats from cross
contamination and other risks. Great care must be taken to ensure that sensors are developed
using food safe materials, or that the materials do not come into direct contact with the food.
Functional materials within food packaging could have undesired impacts on food quality such as
loss of the flavor or texture and even toxicity. Great care must be taken when putting new
materials into contact with food and all smart food packages must be approved by the United
States Food and Drug Administration’s Packaging and Food Contact Substances (FCS)
[Link] is of paramount importance as novel materials like nanoparticles, which have not
been fully studied for long term impacts, are incorporated into food packaging. With proper
regulation, research, and monitoring safety concerns with smart food packaging can be managed
and avoided.
Efficiency
Smart food packaging must be efficient in terms of its desired goal. Active packaging and
corrective responsive packaging must be able to prevent/ attack food threats quickly and
effectively. Triggers and responses must also be toward specific organisms or threats. For
example, food safety sensors in milk production must only respond to pathogenic bacteria, not the
beneficial bacteria. Also, sensors must be reliable. False positives could prove disastrous to food
suppliers as food is unnecessarily recalled. False positives also diminish consumer trust in the
sensing product. For active packaging, the response must be rapid and fully effective for an
appreciable time frame.
7. CONCLUSIONS
Food packaging is poised to advance well beyond its primary functionality as new technologies
and discoveries develop. New packaging functionalities are expected to reach the market over the
next years, including food quality enhancement, quality indicators, indicators of food spoilage or
contamination. This development will be driven by the need to optimize product shelf life and
quality, and by providing more efficient and timely control of food safety along the food supply
chain. This wave of smart packaging will then impact many other industries as food-borne illness
is prevented and food remains on shelves for longer periods of time.
8. SUMMARY
We began this chapter discussing food packaging and how it interacts both with food products
and the outside environment. Then, we explored how these interactions could be used in
functional “smart” packaging technologies. Smart packaging can be further defined as “active”,
“responsive”, or both. We then concluded this chapter with a discussion of rising food packaging
technologies followed by an overview of the challenges and obstacles to smart packaging
technologies.
KEYWORDS
active packaging
bioresponsive
biosensors
food packaging
food safety
foodborne illness
nanocomposites
nanotechnology
responsive packaging
smart packaging
REFERENCES ALL REFRENCES MUST BE NUMBBERED AND IN THE
APLABETICAL ORDER
1. Bajpai, A. K., Bajpai, J., Saini, R., and Gupta, R. (2011). Responsive polymers in biology
and technology. Polymer Reviews, 51, 53-97.
2. Becaro, A. A., Puti, F. C., Correa, D. S., Paris, E. C., Marconcini, J. M., and Ferreira, M.
D. (2015). Polyethylene Films Containing Silver Nanoparticles for Applications in Food
Packaging: Characterization of Physico-Chemical and Anti-Microbial Properties. Journal
of Nanoscience and Nanotechnology, 15, 2148-2156.
3. Bhandari, B. (2012). Food Materials Science and Engineering. Wiley.
4. Biji, K. B., Ravishankar, C. N., Mohan, C. O., and Gopal, T. K. S. (2015). Smart
packaging systems for food applications: a review. Journal of Food Science and
Technology, 1-11.
5. Blum, A. P., Kammeyer, J. K., Rush, A. M., Callmann, C. E., Hahn, M. E., and
Gianneschi, N.C. (2014). Stimuli-Responsive Nanomaterials for Biomedical
Applications. Journal of the American Chemical Society, 137, 2140-2154.
6. Brunazzi, G., Parisi, S., and Pereno, A. (2014). The instrumental role of food packaging.
In: (Ed.), The Importance of Packaging Design for the Chemistry of Food Products,
Springer, pp. 57-86.
7. Cao, W., and Hench, L. L. (1996). Bioactive materials. Ceramics International, 22, 493-
507.
8. Coma, V. (2008). Bioactive packaging technologies for extended shelf life of meat-based
products. Meat Science, 78, 90-103.
9. Costa, C., Antonucci, F., Pallottino, F., Aguzzi, J., Sarriá, D., and Menesatti, P. (2013). A
review on agri-food supply chain traceability by means of RFID technology. Food and
Bioprocess Technology, 6, 353-366.
10. Dallas, P., Sharma, V. K., and Zboril, R. (2011). Silver polymeric nanocomposites as
advanced antimicrobial agents: Classification, synthetic paths, applications, and
perspectives. Advances in Colloid and Interface Science, 166, 119-135.
11. Duncan, T. V. (2011). Applications of nanotechnology in food packaging and food
safety: Barrier materials, antimicrobials and sensors. Journal of Colloid and Interface
Science, 363, 1-24.
12. Feichtinger, M., Zitz, U., Fric, H., Kneifel, W., and Domig, K. J. (2015). An improved
method for microbiological testing of paper-based laminates used in food packaging.
Food Control, 50, 548-553.
13. Fiddes, L. K., Chang, J., and Yan, N. (2014). Electrochemical detection of biogenic
amines during food spoilage using an integrated sensing RFID tag. Sensors and Actuators
B: Chemical, 202, 1298-1304.
14. Fuciños, C., Fuciños, P., Pastrana, L., and Rúa, M. (2014). Functional Characterization of
Poly(N-isopropylacrylamide) Nanohydrogels for the Controlled Release of Food
Preservatives. Food and Bioprocess Technology, 7, 3429-3441.
15. Gómez-Estaca, J., López-de-Dicastillo, C., Hernández-Muñoz, P., Catalá, R., and Gavara,
R. (2014). Advances in antioxidant active food packaging. Trends in Food Science &
Technology, 35, 42-51.
16. Hendrickson, G. R., and Lyon, L. A. (2009). Bioresponsive hydrogels for sensing
applications. Soft Matter, 5, 29-35.
17. [Link] United States Centers for
Disease Control and Prevention, Web, 2014.
18. Jo, H. J., Park, K. M., Na, J. H., Min, S. C., Park, K. H., Chang, P. S., and Han, J. (2015).
Development of anti-insect food packaging film containing a polyvinyl alcohol and
cinnamon oil emulsion at a pilot plant scale. Journal of Stored Products Research, 61,
114-118.
19. Kechichian, V., Ditchfield, C., Veiga-Santos, P., and Tadini, C. C. (2010). Natural
antimicrobial ingredients incorporated in biodegradable films based on cassava starch.
LWT - Food Science and Technology, 43, 1088-1094.
20. Kerry, J. P., O’Grady, M. N., and Hogan, S. A. (2006). Past, current and potential
utilisation of active and intelligent packaging systems for meat and muscle-based
products: A review. Meat Science, 74, 113-130.
21. Kim, K., Kim, E., Lee, S.J. (2012). New enzymatic time–temperature integrator (TTI)
that uses laccase. Journal of Food Engineering, 113, 118-123.
22. Kim, M. J., Jung, S. W., Park, H. R., and Lee, S. J. (2012). Selection of an optimum pH-
indicator for developing lactic acid bacteria-based time–temperature integrators (TTI).
Journal of Food Engineering, 113, 471-478.
23. Kruijf, N. D., Beest, M. V., Rijk, R., Sipiläinen-Malm, T., Losada, P. P., and Meulenaer,
B.D. (2002). Active and intelligent packaging: applications and regulatory aspects. Food
Additives & Contaminants, 19, 144-162.
24. Linssen, J. P. H., and Roozen, J. P. (1994). Food flavour and packaging interactions. In:
M. Mathlouthi (Ed.), Food Packaging and Preservation. Springer US, pp. 48-61.
25. MarketsandMarkets, [Link], 2014.
26. MarketsandMarkets, [Link], 2015.
27. Marsh, K., and Bugusu, B. (2007). Food packaging—roles, materials, and environmental
issues. Journal of food science, 72, R39-R55.
28. Peelman, N., Ragaert, P., De Meulenaer, B., Adons, D., Peeters, R., Cardon, L., Van
Impe, F., and Devlieghere, F. (2013). Application of bioplastics for food packaging.
Trends in Food Science & Technology, 32, 128-141.
29. Ramos, Ó. L., Fernandes, J. C., Silva, S. I., Pintado, M. E., and Malcata, F. X. (2012).
Edible Films and Coatings from Whey Proteins: A Review on Formulation, and on
Mechanical and Bioactive Properties. Critical Reviews in Food Science and Nutrition, 52,
533-552.
30. Reddy, M. M., Vivekanandhan, S., Misra, M., Bhatia, S. K., and Mohanty, A. K. (2013).
Biobased plastics and bionanocomposites: Current status and future opportunities.
Progress in Polymer Science, 38, 1653-1689.
31. Rhim, J. W., Park, H. M., and Ha, C. S. (2013). Bio-nanocomposites for food packaging
applications. Progress in Polymer Science, 38, 1629-1652.
32. Seydim, A. C., and Sarikus, G. (2006). Antimicrobial activity of whey protein based
edible films incorporated with oregano, rosemary and garlic essential oils. Food Research
International, 39, 639-644.
33. Singh, R. P., and Heldman, D. R. (2001). Introduction to food engineering, Gulf
Professional Publishing.
34. Staples, C. A., Dome, P. B., Klecka, G. M., Oblock, S. T., and Harris, L. R. (1998). A
review of the environmental fate, effects, and exposures of bisphenol A. Chemosphere,
36, 2149-2173.
35. Thompson, A. K. (2010). Modified atmosphere packaging. Controlled atmosphere
storage of fruits and vegetables, 81-115.
36. Ulijn, R. V., Bibi, N., Jayawarna, V., Thornton, P. D., Todd, S. J., Mart, R. J., Smith, A.
M., and Gough, J. E. (2007). Bioresponsive hydrogels. Materials Today, 10, 40-48.
37. Vanderroost, M., Ragaert, P., Devlieghere, F., and De Meulenaer, B. (2014). Intelligent
food packaging: The next generation. Trends in Food Science & Technology, 39, 47-62.
38. Vermeiren, L., Heirlings, L., Devlieghere, F., and Debevere, J. (2003). Oxygen, ethylene
and other scavengers. Novel food packaging techniques, 22-49.
39. Weber, C. J., Haugaard, V., Festersen, R., and Bertelsen, G. (2002). Production and
applications of biobased packaging materials for the food industry. Food Additives &
Contaminants, 19, 172-177.
40. Yam, K. L., Takhistov, P. T., and Miltz, J. (2005). Intelligent Packaging: Concepts and
Applications. Journal of Food Science, 70, R1-R10.