F1000ResearchF1000Research2046-1402F1000 Research LimitedLondon, UK10.12688/f1000research.147446.1Research ArticleArticlesEvaluating the effect of the addition of Nano-cellulose fibers on certain properties of heat-cured acrylic resin denture base material
[version 1; peer review: 1 approved, 1 approved with reservations]
H. FadhelMaysemData CurationFormal AnalysisFunding AcquisitionInvestigationMethodologyResourcesSoftwareValidationWriting – Original Draft Preparation1N.SafiIhabConceptualizationProject AdministrationSupervisionVisualizationWriting – Review & Editinghttps://orcid.org/0000-0002-1455-0439a2
Research Scholar, Department of Prosthodontics, College of Dentistry, University of Baghdad, Baghdad, Iraq
, Department of Prosthodontics, College of Dentistry, University of Baghdad, Baghdad, Iraqihab.nsafi@codental.uobaghdad.edu.iq
Polymethylmethacrylate (PMMA) is the most often used polymer for denture bases because to its inexpensive cost, lightweight nature, insolubility in mouth fluid, outstanding cosmetic features, and ease of repairability. However, various limitations such as insufficient surface hardness, low strength, brittleness, weak flexural strength, poor impact strength, and low fatigue resistance have a detrimental impact on acrylic resins.
Method
This research examined the impact strength, transverse strength, surface hardness, surface roughness, and color stability of heat-cured acrylic denture base material after 0.5% and 1% by wt. CNFs were added. The cellulose nanofibers were combined with a PMMA monomer for 5 minutes in a probe sonicator. One group of samples was made without cellulose nanofibers in PMMA, while two groups were prepared with 0.5% and 1% CNFs by weight, and tests of the impact strength, transverse strength, surface hardness, surface roughness, and color stability of the samples were carried out. The data were analyzed using descriptive statistics, including the mean and standard deviation, and bar charts were used to visualize the results. Sample interactions and fiber dispersion were assessed using FTIR and FE-SEM.
Results
Compared to the control group, 0.5% by wt. and 1% by wt. CNF improved the impact and transverse strength substantially, while shore D surface hardness was not improved. Hue (a) and chroma (b) were substantially influenced by CNF at 0.5% by weight compared to the control group, although surface roughness and color value (L) were not. Surface roughness, color value (L), and color hue (a) were substantially impacted by 1% compared to the control group; however, color chroma (b) was not.
Conclusions
This research found that 0.5% and 1% by wt. CNF in PMMA resin increased the impact strength, transverse strength, surface hardness, surface roughness, color value, hue, and chroma of heat-cured polymethyl methacrylate denture base material.
Cellulose nanofibersCNFPMMAImpacttransversehardnessroughnessColor stabilityThere are no potential financial or other conflicts of interest that have been reported by the authors or planners.The author(s) declared that no grants were involved in supporting this work.1. Introduction
Polymethyl methacrylate (PMMA) has long been used to construct partial or complete edentulous denture bases because of its good color matching with the gum, low cost of manufacture, and biocompatibility within the oral environment.
1,2 In addition, PMMA is dimensionally stable, tasteless and odorless, non-irritating and non-toxic, and is insoluble in saliva.
3,4 PMMA has deficiencies in certain mechanical and physical properties, including impact resistance, flexural strength, fatigue fracture,
5,6 insufficient surface hardness, low strength, and brittleness upon impact.
7 Dentures lose their effectiveness in a significant number of cases (63–68%) due to fractures brought on by chewing forces or impacts from dropping them on hard surfaces while they are out of the mouth.
8,9 Important physical characteristics, such as color stability, must be considered when conducting research to improve the properties of PMMA denture bases via various reinforcing techniques.
Previously, in an effort to prevent fractures, strategies such as metal wires have been used to reinforce the PMMA denture base, but a lack of adhesion between the wire surface and the PMMA matrix has been a problem.
10 Despite the strong impact resistance of butadiene styrene for enhancement of the denture base,
11,12 the bending strength of a copolymer of polymethyl methacrylate and butadiene styrene was found to be lower than that of PMMA and standard acrylic resin.
Micro- or nano-sized fibers and fillers have been used to try to make PMMA denture base materials better in terms of their mechanical and physical properties.
13
Based on recent research, incorporating natural fibers into polymers to improve their properties is an effective technique. Because natural fibers are renewable, affordable, abundant in nature, extremely biocompatible, and possess favorable mechanical properties,
14 the use of natural fibers (ramie fiber or oil palm empty fruit cluster fiber) as strengtheners can enhance the flexural capabilities of heat-polymerizing PMMA denture base material.
15,16
Several nanoparticles have been used to improve the mechanical and physical properties of polymer composites. Among them, cellulose nanomaterial has been dubbed “the future of materials” and has been the subject of numerous studies in the past two decades.
17,18
Many researchers are interested in cellulosic nanomaterials due to their natural abundance and biodegradability, as well as their many other properties that contribute to the functionality and improvement of material performance. The creation of polymer nanocomposites utilizing nano-cellulose has grown in popularity due to the unique properties of these nanoparticles, such as their abundance of surface OH groups. Compared to other synthetic fibers, cellulose nanofibers have superior mechanical properties, high aspect ratios, and are a readily available material resource.
19 Using chemical and mechanical procedures, cellulose from any source, such as wood pulp,
20 is converted into cellulose nanofibers which is also known as cellulose nanofibril or nanofibrilated cellulose. CNFs have notable potential in dental applications. Their unique shape, which incorporates nano- and microscale capabilities, supports their use as a mechanical reinforcement.
21
CNFs have a diameter on the nanometer scale and a length of a few micrometers.
22,23 The aim of this study was to look at how mechanical and physical properties change in heat-cured acrylic resin with 0.5% and 1% cellulose nanofibers by weight added to it. As far as the authors are aware, no prior research has examined the impact of adding CNFs to heat-cured denture base material.
The null hypothesis of this study was that adding 0.5–1% by weight of CNFs would have no significant effect on the impact strength, transverse strength, surface hardness, surface roughness, and color stability of PMMA heat-cured denture base material.
Figshare: checklist for (Evaluating the effect of the addition of Nano-Cellulose fibers on certain properties of heat-cured acrylic resin denture base material),
https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.25048673.v1.
61
2. Methods
In this investigation, a conventional acrylic resin denture base material (Supracryl Plus, Czech Republic, catalogue N. 129 4328411) was used, and cellulose nanofibers (Nanografi Nano Technology Company, Germany, NG01NC0201) (CNFs; diameter: 40–80 nm; length: 2–5 μm) were added to the PMMA liquid at two different concentrations, 0.5% and 1%.
Mixing percentages of acrylic and CNF for the pilot study.
Group
Amount of acrylic polymer (PMMA)
Amount of acrylic monomer (MMA)
Amount of CNF powder
Control
12 g
6 ml
0
0.5%
11.940g
6 ml
0.060 g
1%
11.880g
6 ml
0.120 g
2.1 Study design
A total of 0.5, 1, 1.5, and 2 wt.% of CNFs were added to the resin, and then the transverse strength and hardness of each percentage were tested and compared with the control group (acrylic resin without CNFs). The two most appropriate percentages were determined to be 0.5 and 1% wt based on these tests. Therefore, these concentrations were utilized for the study.
A total of 150 samples were created and split evenly into three groups based on the amount of cellulose nanofibers present: 0% CNF (control), 0.5% CNF (test), and 1% CNF (test). The samples were divided into five classes based on the tests of impact and transverse strength, as well as those for surface hardness, surface roughness, and color stability.
2.2 Sample preparation
Specimens were prepared in the shape of bars measuring 80 mm × 10 mm × 4 mm for the impact strength test,
24 and bar specimens measuring 65 × 10 × 2.5 mm were prepared for the surface hardness, transverse strength, and surface roughness tests.
25 A sample disc with a 20 mm diameter and a 2 mm thickness was made and used in the color change experiments. The plastic molds were cut with a laser cutter to the precise dimensions needed for each test.
26 All of the samples were created following the standard practice for making removable dentures from acrylic. The molds were made by placing plastic samples in an extra-hard Type IV dental die stone. Samples of acrylic resin were packed using these molds. Control samples of heat-cured acrylic were made by combining the liquid and powder components of PMMA. To ensure that the mold was completely filled with acrylic dough, we used a hydraulic press set at a pressure of 100 Kp/cm
2 to gradually squeeze the flask after joining its two halves with a polyethylene sheet. The polyethylene sheet was taken out of the flask after the pressure was released. The extra material was cut away with a razor-sharp wax knife. After removing the polyethylene sheet from the second closure, the flask was pressed (100 Kp/cm
2) for five minutes. The flask was sealed and taken to a curing water bath. Following the manufacturer’s guidelines for acrylic resin, the flasks were placed clamped in a thermostatically controlled water bath at room temperature, the temperature was increased to 70 °C, the flasks were left at this temperature for 30 minutes, and finally the temperature was raised to 100 °C. The flasks were kept for 30 minutes in this temperature to complete the curing process. The polymerization flasks were left to cool, and the specimens were kept in distilled water for 48 hours before further testing.
2.3 CNF incorporation
The CNFs were surface-modified with methyl methacrylate (MMA) to create a homogenized dispersion and prevent agglomeration of the CNFs in the heat-cured acrylic resin polymer.
27 CNF-incorporated samples were prepared by adding 0.5% and 1% by weight of CNFs to the liquid of heat-cured acrylic resin denture base material and mixing this mixture in a probe sonicator device (120 W, 60 KHz), (soniprep-150, England) for about 5 minutes, then adding this mixture to the acrylic polymer to manually complete the blending.
Impact strength test
Thirty samples were made in total, with ten serving as a control group and the remaining twenty being acrylic samples with varying concentrations of cellulose nanofibers added (0.5% and 1%).
The Charpy’s impact testing apparatus (Testing Machines Inc., USA) and the method specified in ISO 179-1:2000
24 were used to conduct the test, which involved holding the specimen horizontally at its ends and striking it with a free-swinging pendulum that could generate a force of 2 joules. A scale measured the amount of impact energy that was absorbed. In order to determine the impact energy in kilojoules per square meter, the following equation was used
24:
impact stength=Eb.d×103where E is the impact energy in Joules, b is the width of the specimen in millimeters, and d is the thickness of the specimen in millimeters.
Transverse strength test
Thirty samples were made in total, with ten serving as a control group and the remaining twenty being acrylic samples with varying concentrations of cellulose nanofibers added.
For this evaluation, a standard Instron device was used. The testing fixture consisted of two parallel supports spaced 50 mm apart, onto which each specimen was placed. A road positioned in the middle of the supports applied the load at a cross-head speed of 1 mm/min, resulting in deflection until fracture. The formula for determining the transverse strength was as follows:
Transverse strength=3PI2BD2where P is the maximum load, I is the span length, and B is the sample width.
25 D denotes the sample’s thickness.
Shore D surface hardness
The surface hardness was measured with a Shore D durometer (HT-5610D, China) which had been verified for use with acrylic resins. A spring-loaded indenter of 0.8 mm in diameter is the main component of this tool. The digital scale with indenter graduated from zero to one hundred. The recommended method involved making a quick, firm press on the indenter to obtain a reading. Each specimen had its center and two ends measured separately, and the average of these three readings was used.
Surface roughness test
The micro geometry of the samples was examined using a computerized profilometer (LR300, China). The apparatus was connected to a multidirectional metal stand, and this system was linked to a computer. The stylus was adjusted by the metal stand to make contact with specimens and yielded detailed measurements for each specimen. The specimen was placed on a stable and rigid surface before the stylus made contact. Denture base roughness was represented by the parameter Ra, which can be described as the mean arithmetic average of the absolute values of the roughness profile.
28
Color stability test
The contrast between the test samples and the control samples was measured by acquiring digital images of both the control and experimental specimens. The digital images were taken with a Canon EOS Rebel T3i SLR camera and a Sigma 105 mm f/2.8 DG OS HSM Macro lens made in Japan.
26 The digital camera was set to manual mode and placed in a perpendicular stand holder so that the shutter speed and f-stop could be adjusted to 1/60 and 5.6, respectively. These measurements were not altered during the photography process.
The digital images were transferred to a computer and saved as TIFF files. The photos were analyzed using Adobe Photoshop CS6, Version 13.0.1.1 (Adobe Systems, United States). Using mathematical modeling, values for red, green, and blue were acquired and then translated to (L-a-b) or (v-h-c).
26 The color deviation (DE) was measured using the CIE (Commission Internationale de l’Éclairage) and the RGB Lab system, as shown in
Figure 1.
Parameters (L, a, and b) from the palette pane of the color picker.
The addition of CNF to PMMA was followed by measurements of L, a, and b to determine the color shift in the samples.
29 To guarantee consistent and reliable readings, the acrylic sample was attached to and detached from a stable surveyor’s table and then put parallel to the camera lens at regular intervals.
30 In order to standardize the calculations, a sixty-pixel square measurement template was created in a sample’s center. The L, a, and b values for the colors were taken from the color picker’s palette window.
26
The color coordinates (L, a, and b) of each sample were measured:
Control group: L0, a0, and b0.
After the incorporation of 0.5% CNFs to PMMA: L1, a1, and b1 were measured.
After 1% by wt. CNF addition: L2, a2, and b2 were measured.
Fourier transform infrared (FTIR) spectroscopy
Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy (Fourier-transform, 1800, Sigmadzyu, Japan) was used to determine whether PMMA heat-cured resin and CNFs exhibited any chemical interaction. The modified groups with 1% CNFs, the control group with only PMMA, and the CNF powder-only group were all analyzed.
Field-Emission Scanning Electron Microscopy (FESEM)
Four specimens were evaluated in total: one for the control group, two for the experimental groups (0.5% wt. and 1% wt. CNF), and one for the CNF powder. Using a sharp knife, square specimens (2 mm × 10 mm) were used, and 1 nm of gold was applied to the specimens’ testing surfaces. This sputter-coated film enabled uniform and profound electron dispersion throughout the specimen. A field emission scanning electron microscope (INSPECTF50, Netherlands) was used to ascertain the dispersion of CNFs in the polymethylmethacrylate (PMMA).
3. Results3.1 Results of experimental tests
3.1.1 Impact strength test
The average impact strength shown a notable improvement upon incorporation of CNF at 0.5% and 1% by weight concentrations.
After 48 hours of incubation in distilled water, the reinforced groups (0.5 and 1% by wt. CNF) exhibited noticeably greater impact strength compared to the control group. Results are displayed in
Figure 2(A) from the impact strength test, where the control and experimental groups were compared using the unpaired t-test.
Bar charts for, (A) Impact strength test; (B) Transverse strength test; (C) Surface hardness test;(D) Surface roughness test; (E) Color stability test.
3.1.2 Transverse strength test
The transverse strength of the control group (PMMA without CNF addition), two reinforced groups (0.5% and 1%), and the results of the unpaired t-test are shown in
Figure 2B.
Compared to the control group, the experimental groups showed a considerably increased transverse strength at 0.5% and 1%, respectively. As a whole, the 0.5% group scored the highest, then the 1% group, and lastly the control group.
3.1.3 Shore D surface hardness test
Figure 2(C) displays the results of an unpaired t-test and descriptive statistics applied to the Shore D surface hardness test; these reveal that the control group’s surface hardness did not significantly increase with the addition of 0.5% and 1% by weight CNF, respectively.
3.1.4 Surface roughness test
After 48 hours of incubation in distilled water, the surface roughness test revealed that the control group had a value of 2.8660 μm for surface texture roughness, while the 0.5% and 1% groups had values of 2.8977 and 3.3023 μm, respectively. The control group had lower mean values than the experimental groups (0.5 and 1%).
Figure 2(D) displays the findings of the descriptive statistics and statistical test of surface roughness, which compared the control and experimental groups’ means using an unpaired t-test. With a p-value of just 0.0345, the 1% difference between the two groups was statistically significant. The difference between the control group and the group that received specimens with 0.5% reinforced acrylic was not statistically significant (P value = 0.8539).
3.1.5 Color stability test
For color data studies of color stability, the means and standard deviations of the dependent variables ΔL*, Δa*, and Δb* were determined. The results of the color stability test, including the average and value (L), are shown in
Figure 2(E). In terms of mean value, the L2 experimental group came out on top with 32.40, followed by the L1 group with 26.80, and finally the L0 control group with 26.70. While the L0 and L1 groups did not vary statistically, the L0 and L2 groups did, thus the material become lighter in color.
The a0 group had an average color value of 4,400, the a2 group of 1,500, and the a1 group of 1,100. A statistically significant difference in hue was found between the a0 control group and the experimental groups (a1, a2). This was established using an unpaired t-test. The b chroma was detected. The b0 control group had the highest mean chroma value of 12.00, followed by the b2 group with a value of 11.90 and the b1 group with a value of 7.88.
Based on an unpaired t-test, the chroma levels experienced a significant drop in the b1 group, whereas there was no significant change seen in the b2 or control groups.
25ΔE∗=[(ΔL∗)2+(Δa∗)2+(Δb∗)2]1/2.ΔE∗(0.5%)=[(L0−L1)2+(a0−a1)2+(b0−b1)2]1/2=[(26.70−26.80)2+(4.400−1.100)2+(12.00−7.88)2]1/2=[(−0.1)2+(3.3)2+(4.12)2]1/2=[0.001+10.89+16.97]1/2ΔE∗(0.5%)=5.2ΔE∗(1%)=[(L0_L2)2+(a0_a2)2+(b0_b2)2]1/2=[(26.70−32.40)2+(4.400−1.500)2+(12.00−11.900)]1/2=[(−5.7)2+(2.9)2+(0.1)2]1/2=[32.49+8.41+0.01]1/2ΔE∗(1%)=6.3
The CNF’s structure includes the functional group OH. As can be seen in
Figure 3, the OH stretching vibration can be seen at 3342 cm
−1 in the FTIR spectrum of CNF powder, while the OH bending vibration can be seen at 1606 cm
−1.
FTIR spectrum of CNF powder control, control sample PMMA, 1%CNF(Cellulose nanofibers) reinforced PMMA(polymethylmethacrylate) sample.
The fingerprint vibration bands of PMMA are seen at 1732 cm
−1 C=O stretching mode. Band at 2949 cm
−1 are associated with methylene C-H stretching. The spectra of the nanocomposite (PMMA with 1% CNF) are remarkably similar to that of pure PMMA.
3.1.7 Field-Emission scanning electron microscopy (FE-SEM)
The field emission scanning electron microscopy (FE-SEM) pictures clearly demonstrated that the fibers had a diameter in the nanometer range, as shown in
Figure 4(A&B). The C and D in
Figure 4 displayed acrylic in its original state, prior to any modifications. Furthermore, Field Emission Scanning Electron Microscopy (FESEM) demonstrated the successful integration of nanofibers into the PMMA resin by the use of a probe sonicator mixer.
FE-SEM micrograph (A and B) cellulose nanofibers powder at 25000 and 110 000 magnification; (Cand D) heat cured acrylic resin controlled specimens at 1000× and 4000× magnification respectively; (E and F) acrylic specimens reinforced with 0.5% CNF at 1000× and 4000× magnification; (G and H) specimens reinforced with 1.5% CNF at 1000x and 4000×.
4. Discussion
Denture bases are affected by the moist conditions of the oral environment as a result of the constant presence of saliva in the oral cavity, as well as other adverse conditions, such as load from mastication. Improvements in the features of denture acrylic can be achieved through the utilization of nanomaterials. The inclusion of nanofibers or nanotubes has been found to yield more substantial improvements in the properties of polymethyl methacrylate (PMMA) compared to the use of nanoparticle fillers. This is mostly due to the fact that nanotubes and nanofibers possess a greater ratio of surface area to volume than nanoparticle fillers.
This study was designed to evaluate the effects of various loadings of CNF fibers (0.5% and 1%) on the impact strength, transverse strength, shore D surface hardness, surface roughness, and color stability of PMMA heat-cured denture base material. Additionally, the morphological and structural characteristics were examined using field-emission scanning electron microscopy (FE-SEM) and Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy (FTIR).
Considerable improvements in the mechanical characteristics were reported in all experimental tests with 0.5% and 1% CNF addition. This was due to the homogenous dispersion of CNFs in the polymeric matrix, which was critical to the composite’s performance. The addition of nanofibers or nanotubes dramatically improved the impact strength of PMMA compared to nanoparticle fillers. This was primarily due to the fact that nanotubes and nanofibers have a higher surface area to volume ratio than nanoparticles (the ratio of nanofibers can be up to 103 times that of microfibers). Superior mechanical performance (such as stiffness and strength) tends to be achieved compared to any other form of the material.
31 The nano metric scale can generate massive and extended specific surface areas of up to 1000 m
2/g.
32 Thus, nanocomposites have a larger interfacial matrix material surface (interphase), which has been reported to play an important role in the interface quality of nanocomposite properties, thereby achieving efficient load transfer from the matrix to the CNF.
33 In one study, addition of cellulose nanofibers to epoxy composite increased the impact strength of the epoxy.
34 Another study discovered that adding a modest amount (0.3 wt.%) of unmodified cellulose nanofibers from pineapple leaves to PMMA nanocomposite enhanced the impact strength significantly. The researchers attributed this to the hollow structure of the fiber giving an anti-vibration effect.
35
The addition of 0.5% and 1% by wt. CNFs to PMMA significantly increased the transverse strength when compared to the control group. This effect was due to the high tensile strength and elastic modulus of CNFs. These results were consistent with previous findings for PMMA denture base materials combined with microcrystalline cellulose fiber derived from natural oil palm empty fruit bunches.
36 They were also consistent with the findings of a study that added cellulose nanofibers to epoxy composites, which resulted in an increase in the transverse strength and epoxy modulus.
34 Similar findings were reported for the addition of cellulose nanofibers to thermoplastic and injection molded PMMA heat polymerized acrylic resin denture base material.
37 Another study found a significant increase in transverse strength after the addition of 0.5% and 1% by wt. sisal nanofibers to PMMA denture base material.
38
The addition of 0.5% and 1% CNFs caused a small increase in the shore D surface hardness of specimens, which may be attributed to the homogenous distribution of CNFs in the acrylic matrix. The nanofibers were dispersed uniformly throughout the polymer, as shown in
Figure 4 (E&F), and developed networks within the polymer over time, thereby reducing the inter-aggregate space and increasing the material’s toughness, stiffness, and hardness.
Interlaminar toughness enhancement in fiber-reinforced composites has been the subject of research for some time, as it is directly related to the composite’s dynamic and damage tolerance performance. A number of strategies have been explored, including stitching,
39 Z-pinning,
40,41 and interleaving,
42 resulting in a substantial increase in toughness and enhancements to mechanical qualities like fatigue life. To achieve the desired interlaminar fracture toughness, other approaches have focused on adjusting the matrix or interface properties. Importantly, toughening the matrix can be achieved either through chemical modification or, more recently, through the addition of chemicals to the matrix material. Grafting can also be utilized to make the fibers and matrix more chemically compatible.
43 One study added 0.5% and 1% cellulose nanofibers to maxillofacial silicon material and found a statically significant increase in the shore A surface hardness of the silicon matrix.
44 Hussein reported that an increasing nano-filler concentration of zirconia nanoparticles significantly increased the surface hardness.
45 The addition of 0.25 wt.% and 0.2 wt.% TiO
2 nano-filler, respectively, to the VST50F and Cosmesil M511 elastomers led to a statistically significant increase in their mean values.
46 In contrast to these results, PMMA surface hardness was decreased insignificantly with the addition of 1% sisal nanofibers.
38
In this investigation, a profilometer device was utilized, which has been acknowledged as a highly effective method for examining the roughness of the surface of restorative materials. The device provides readings that can be evaluated through statistical analysis and comparison.
47 The mean value of surface roughness in the 1% group was the highest, followed by the 0.5% group and the control group. When compared to the control group, adding 0.5% by weight of cellulose nanofibers (CNF) did not make the surface rougher in a way that was statistically significant. However, a significant increase in surface roughness was seen in the 1% group when compared to the control group. The increase in surface roughness of the PMMA denture base material can be attributed to the agglomeration of fibers on the surfaces of the samples, which occurs as the concentration of fibers increases. Additionally, it should be noted that CNFs have small whiskers that extend outward from their surface. The arrangement of CNF fibers during sample preparation is presumed to be random. The presence of various orientations and scattered projecting whiskers on the surface of the PMMA may contribute to the observed increase in the average surface roughness following the addition of cellulose nanofibers. The null hypothesis for surface roughness in this study was rejected because there was a statistically significant difference between the group that did not have nanofibers (PMMA) and the group that had 1% CNFs added to it. Selective dissolving is employed in certain instances to increase the surface roughness of PMMA nanofibers. In this process, polyethylene oxide (PEO) is taken out of a mix of PMMA and PEO. This leaves holes and other irregularities on the surface of the nanofibers.
48 Adding nanofibers to PMMA (polymethyl methacrylate) denture base material could have different effects on the surface roughness, depending on the fibers and processing methods used. Adding nanofibers to polymethyl methacrylate (PMMA) has been shown in several studies to make the surface rougher.
49 It was found in one study that adding plasma-treated polypropylene fibers to PMMA heat-cured denture bases made the surfaces of the samples rougher.
50 In another study,
51 it was shown that adding 7% by wt. of ZrO
2 nanoparticles (NPs) to PMMA resin made the surface a little rougher. On the other hand, it has been observed that the addition of a specific amount of silicon carbide filler decreases surface roughness.
52 The addition of synthesized inorganic, organic, and hybrid nanofibers to PMMA denture base material did not result in a significant effect on the surface roughness of reinforced specimens.
53 Addition of 0.5% and 1% nano sisal fiber to PMMA denture base resulted in a significant decrease of surface roughness,
38 and it was also found that the addition of burnt sienna intrinsic pigment to silicone elastomer for maxillofacial prostheses did not significantly affect the surface roughness of the silicon matrix.
54
For aesthetic reasons, denture base material should be transparent and have pigmentation allowing it to blend in with natural teeth and gums.
55 Additionally, it needs to have excellent color stability in the dynamic oral environment. Adobe Photoshop is often used for digital color analysis in scientific studies of PMMA (polymethyl methacrylate) color stability. Several researchers have examined the effects of various solutions on the optical behavior of 3D-printed resins,
56 using Adobe Photoshop as a color assessment tool to evaluate the color stability and wear resistance of provisional restoration.
56 In another study, Ali and Safi conducted an assessment of the color stability of maxillofacial silicone following the incorporation of cellulose nanofibers. The evaluation was also performed using Adobe Photoshop software
v22.5.8.998 Adobe Systems, USA),
https://www.adobe.com/products/photoshop/free-trial-download.html. As indicated by Ref.
44.
Adobe Photoshop can be used for the comparative analysis of color alterations before and after exposure to varying environmental conditions. The software facilitates accurate measurement and analysis of color fluctuations, enhancing the general understanding of the color stability of polymers.
Digital cameras generate images by capturing photographs on a light-sensing medium, resulting in images composed of blue, green, and red RGB values for each individual pixel.
57 Based on the findings derived from this investigation, it was evident that color instability occurs in the PMMA, irrespective of whether it is pigmented or not, as shown by ΔE > 1.5. It is worth noting that both intrinsic and external factors have the potential to induce modifications in color value and chromatic alterations.
26
Within the polymer matrix, a denser network forms as the fiber load increases. The fibers tend to occupy any voids or gaps within the polymer. Due to the interaction between light and the polymer, light transmission may be limited. This can cause some light to be partially absorbed and some to be partially reflected. It is the scattering effect of CNFs that reduces light transmission. Because the nanofiber and acrylic polymer have distinct indices of refraction, they cause light to scatter. The scattering effect diminishes the transparency and lightness of the material. Each of the reinforced groups had reduced Chroma and lighter color values compared to the control group.
The decrease in color saturation (Chroma) was because nanofibers absorb or scatter light.
26 This can be caused by the rough surface scattering light in a way that leads to lower color intensity. Additionally, the uneven distribution of nanofibers in the polymer may scatter light more, resulting in lower color intensity.
Highly significant decreases in color hue can have several causes. The size and distribution of nanofillers within the PMMA matrix can impact the way light interacts with the material. Nanofillers of certain sizes may preferentially scatter or absorb specific wavelengths, leading to changes in color. The uniform dispersion of nanofillers is crucial. Aggregation can lead to uneven coloration and affect the overall color hue of the material. In addition, the conditions under which the nanofillers are incorporated into the PMMA matrix can influence their dispersion and, consequently, the optical properties of the resulting material.
The null hypothesis of this study was rejected, because significant differences was detected among the studied groups. In agreement with this study, significant color change were found to occur after the addition of 1% cellulose nanofibers to vulcanized maxillofacial silicon.
39 Significant color variations were also observed between the control group and specimens reinforced with ZrO2 nanoparticles (NPs) in various immersion solutions.
58
In contrast to this study, Safi et al.
59 investigated the effect of zirconia nanoparticles on the color properties of polymethyl methacrylate (PMMA), and found no obvious color alterations.
The FTIR revealed that after adding CNF to PMMA, the peak of the OH stretching vibration disappeared and its intensity diminished. The OH bending vibration at 1606 cm-1 in the CNF spectrum appeared as a new peak after the addition of fibers to the polymer owing to the interaction the OH- functional groups of the CNFs with each other to form physical blending, and the interaction with each (O) pair’s electron in PMMA, as shown in
Figure 3. Moreover, the presence of more than one active site of the functional-OH group leads to physical interactions (molecular interaction) by Van de Waals forces and hydrogen bonds, which enhance bonding strength. Both of these increase the adhesive forces and shear strength.
60
FE-SEM demonstrated that a 0.5% CNF concentration was well-dispersed and agglomeration-free, as shown in
Figure 4 (E&F). Agglomeration and poor distribution of nanofibers was noted in 1.5% CNFs, as shown in
Figure 4 (G&H).
5. Conclusions
Incorporating different weight percentages of cellulose nanofibers (0.5–1%) wt. into heat-cured denture base material significantly improved some of its mechanical properties, namely, its impact strength and transverse strength, with the optimum improvement obtained at a concentration of 0.5% CNFs by weight. Cellulose nanofibers increased the hardness and surface roughness of the acrylic resin. The increase was directly proportional to the concentration of the nanofibers, and was within an acceptable clinical range, with no effect on the other material properties. The addition of CNFs at 0.5% wt. had no effect into the translucency of the acrylic material, but a concentration of 1% wt. led to a decrease in translucency. The addition of 0.5% and 1% CNFs led to a significant increase in the color hue (a), while 0.5% CNF increased the color chroma (b) significantly.
The cellulose nanofibers were effectively dispersed inside the acrylic resin according to FE-SEM, and the FTIR analysis demonstrated highly physical blending between the CNFs and the heat-cured acrylic denture base material.
Figshare: Evaluating the effect of the addition of Nano-Cellulose fibers on certain properties of heat-cured acrylic resin denture base material.
https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.25048673.v1.
61
This project contains the following underlying data:
Impact strength (Raw data of impact strength test)
Transverse strength (Raw data of transverse strength test)
Surface hardness (Raw data of Surface hardness test)
Surface roughness (Raw data of Surface roughness test)
Color stability (All raw data of Color stability test)
Data are available under the terms of
Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license (CC BY 4.0).
ReferencesKarciMDemirNYazmanS:
Evaluation of flexural strength of different denture base materials reinforced with different nanoparticles.Journal of Prosthodontics.2019;28(5):572–579.
3029855810.1111/jopr.12974SahinOKorogluADedeDÖ:
Effect of surface sealant agents on the surface roughness and color stability of denture base materials.Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry.2016 Oct 1;116(4):610–616.
2717877210.1016/j.prosdent.2016.03.007SpasojevicPZrilicMPanicV:
The mechanical properties of a poly (methyl methacrylate) denture base material modified with dimethyl itaconate and di-n-butyl itaconate.International Journal of Polymer Science.2015 Jun 4;2015:1–9.
10.1155/2015/561012ZafarMS:
Prosthodontic applications of polymethyl methacrylate (PMMA): An update.Polymers.2020 Oct 8;12(10):2299.
3304998410.3390/polym12102299PMC7599472GadMMAl-ThobityAMRahomaA:
Reinforcement of PMMA denture base material with a mixture of ZrO 2 nanoparticles and glass fibers.International Journal of Dentistry.2019 Jan 28;2019:1–11.
3080926010.1155/2019/2489393PMC6369466SomaniMVKhandelwalMPuniaV:
The effect of incorporating various reinforcement materials on flexural strength and impact strength of polymethylmethacrylate: A meta-analysis.The Journal of the Indian Prosthodontic Society.2019 Apr;19(2):101–112.
3104054310.4103/jips.jips_313_18PMC6482623AlharebAOAkilHMAhmadZA:
Impact strength, fracture toughness and hardness improvement of PMMA denture base through addition of nitrile rubber/ceramic fillers.The Saudi Journal for Dental Research.2017 Jan 1;8(1-2):26–34.
10.1016/j.sjdr.2016.04.004SalihSIOleiwiJKMohamedAS:
Investigation of mechanical properties of PMMA composite reinforced with different types of natural powders.ARPN Journal of Engineering and Applied Sciences.2018 Nov;13(22):8889–8900.MowadeTKDangeSPThakreMB:
Effect of fiber reinforcement on impact strength of heat polymerized polymethyl methacrylate denture base resin: in vitro study and SEM analysis.The Journal of Advanced Prosthodontics.2012 Feb 1;4(1):30–36.
2243909810.4047/jap.2012.4.1.30PMC3303918ÖzdemirAKDemirHDoğanDÖ:
Effects of boron on the mechanical properties of polymethylmethacrylate denture base material.European Oral Research.2021 Jan 1;55(1):45–53.
3393776210.26650/eor.20210132AllaRKSajjanSAlluriVR:
Influence of fiber reinforcement on the properties of denture base resins.Journal of Biomaterials and Nanobiotechnology.2013;04:91–97.
10.4236/jbnb.2013.41012MurthyHMShaikSSachdevaH:
Effect of reinforcement using stainless steel mesh, glass fibers, and polyethylene on the impact strength of heat cure denture base resin-an in vitro study.Journal of International Oral Health: JIOH.2015 Jun;7(6):71–79.
26124604GadMMFoudaSMAl-HarbiFA:
PMMA denture base material enhancement: a review of fiber, filler, and nanofiller addition.Int. J. Nanomedicine.2017 May 17;12:3801–3812.
2855311510.2147/IJN.S130722PMC5440038KongITshaiKYHoqueME:
Manufacturing of natural fibre-reinforced polymer composites by solvent casting method.Manufacturing of Natural Fibre Reinforced Polymer Composites.2015; pp.331–349.
10.1007/978-3-319-07944-8_16XuJLiYYuT:
Reinforcement of denture base resin with short vegetable fiber.Dental Materials.2013;29(12):1273–1279.
2414482610.1016/j.dental.2013.09.013JohnJAnn ManiSPalaniswamyK:
Flexural properties of poly (Methyl Methacrylate) resin reinforced with oil palm empty fruit bunch fibers: a preliminary finding.Journal of Prosthodontics.2015;24(3):233–238.
2497614710.1111/jopr.12191PhuongHTThoaNKTuyetPTA:
Cellulose nanomaterials as a future, sustainable and renewable material.Crystals.2022;12(1):106.
10.3390/cryst12010106TracheDTarchounAFDerradjiM:
Nanocellulose: from fundamentals to advanced applications.Frontiers in Chemistry.2020;8:392.
3243563310.3389/fchem.2020.00392PMC7218176TayebAHAminiEGhasemiS:
Cellulose nanomaterials—Binding properties and applications: A review.Molecules.2018;23(10):2684.
3034037410.3390/molecules23102684PMC6222763JonoobiMOladiRDavoudpourY:
Different preparation methods and properties of nanostructured cellulose from various natural resources and residues: a review.Cellulose.2015;22:935–969.
10.1007/s10570-015-0551-0ThomasSPaulSAPothanLA:
Natural fibres: structure, properties and applications. Cellulose Fibers: Bio-and Nano-Polymer Composites.Green Chemistry and Technology;2011; pp.3–42.
10.1007/978-3-642-17370-7_1SouzaSFerreiraMSainM:
The use of curaua fibers as reinforcements in composites.Biofiber Reinforcements in Composite Materials.2015; pp.700–720. Elsevier.
10.1533/9781782421276.5.700SouzaSFLeaoALCaiJH:
Nanocellulose from curava fibers and their nanocomposites.Molecular Crystals and Liquid Crystals.2010;522(1):42/[342]–52/[352].
10.1080/15421401003722955ISO E:
179-1. Plastics: Determination of Charpy impact properties: Part 1: Non-instrumented impact test European Committee for Standardization CEN.Bruxelles, Belgium:2000.American Dental Association Specification No.12:
Guide to dental materials and devicies.10th ed.Chicago:1999; p.32.Abdul-KareemSAl-MaroofAGFadhilNH:
Color stability of different aesthetic resin composite materials: a digital image analysis.Indian Journal of Forensic Medicine & Toxicology.2020 Jan 16;14(1):1210–1215.ShihYFChouMYLianHY:
Highly transparent and impact-resistant PMMA nanocomposites reinforced by cellulose nanofibers of pineapple leaves modified by eco-friendly methods.Express Polymer Letters.2018 Sep 1;12(9):844–854.
10.3144/expresspolymlett.2018.72TaylorRMaryanCVerranJ:
Retention of oral microorganisms on cobalt-chromium alloy and dental acrylic resin with different surface finishes.Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry.1998;80(5):592–597.
981381110.1016/S0022-3913(98)70037-XYetkinerEWegehauptFWiegandA:
Colour improvement and stability of white spot lesions following infiltration, micro-abrasion, or fluoride treatments in vitro.European Journal of Orthodontics.2014;36(5):595–602.
10.1093/ejo/cjt095HallgrenKAkyalcinSEnglishJ:
Color properties of demineralized enamel surfaces treated with a resin infiltration system.Journal of Esthetic and Restorative Dentistry.2016;28(5):339–346.
10.1111/jerd.12207NjugunaJPielichowskiKDesaiS:
Nanofiller-reinforced polymer nanocomposites.Polymers for Advanced Technologies.2008;19(8):947–959.
10.1002/pat.1074NjugunaJPielichowskiKAlcockJR:
Epoxy-based fibre reinforced nanocomposites.Advanced Engineering Materials.2007;9(10):835–847.
10.1002/adem.200700118De AzeredoHM:
Nanocomposites for food packaging applications.Food Research International.2009;42(9):1240–1253.
10.1016/j.foodres.2009.03.019SabaNMohammadFPervaizM:
Mechanical, morphological and structural properties of cellulose nanofibers reinforced epoxy composites.International Journal of Biological Macromolecules.2017;97:190–200.
2808222310.1016/j.ijbiomac.2017.01.029ShihYFChouMYLianHY:
Highly transparent and impact-resistant PMMA nanocomposites reinforced by cellulose nanofibers of pineapple leaves modified by eco-friendly methods.Express Polymer Letters.2018 Sep 1;12(9):844–854.
10.3144/expresspolymlett.2018.72JohnJAnn ManiSPalaniswamyK:
Flexural properties of poly (Methyl Methacrylate) resin reinforced with oil palm empty fruit bunch fibers: a preliminary finding.J. Prosthodont.2015;24(3):233–238.
2497614710.1111/jopr.12191KawaguchiTLassilaLVBabaH:
Effect of cellulose nanofiber content on flexural properties of a model, thermoplastic, injection-molded, polymethyl methacrylate denture base material.J. Mech. Behav. Biomed. Mater.2020 Feb 1;102:103513.
10.1016/j.jmbbm.2019.103513HameedTMAl-DabbaghBMJasimRK:
Reinforcement of denture base materials with Nano sisal fibers powder.Materials Today: Proceedings.2022 Jan 1;61:1015–1022.
10.1016/j.matpr.2021.10.287JohnsonWS:
Delamination and debonding of materials: a symposium sponsored by ASTM Committees D-30 on High Modulus Fibers and Their Composites and E-24 on Fracture Testing, Pittsburgh, Pa., 8-10 Nov. 1983: ASTM International.1985.CartieIK:
Partridge.Proc. of 44th AIAA/ASME/ASCE/AHS/ASC Structures, Structural Dynamics, and Materials Conference. Apr 7-10 2003.Norfolk:2003;1,707MarascoAICartiéDDPartridgeIK:
Mechanical properties balance in novel Z-pinned sandwich panels: Out-of-plane properties.Composites Part A: Applied Science and Manufacturing.2006 Feb 1;37(2):295–302.
10.1016/j.compositesa.2005.03.029ChanWWangA:
A study on the effects of the 90 deg ply on matrix cracks in composite laminates. In27th Structures, Structural Dynamics and Materials Conference.1986; p.1018.XuLRBhamidipatiVZhongWH:
Mechanical property characterization of a polymeric nanocomposite reinforced by graphitic nanofibers with reactive linkers.Journal of Composite Materials.2004 Sep;38(18):1563–1582.
10.1177/0021998304043758AliAASafiIN:
Impact of nano-cellulose fiber addition on physico-mechanical properties of room temperature vulcanized maxillofacial siliconematerial.Journal of Taibah University Medical Sciences.2023 Dec;18(6):1616–1626.
3771175710.1016/j.jtumed.2023.07.002PMC10497998RahmanHA:
The effect of addition nano particle ZrO2 on some properties of autoclave processed heat cure acrylic denture base material.Journal of Baghdad College of Dentistry.2015;27:32–39.
10.12816/0015262ShakirDAAbdul-AmeerFM:
Effect of nano-titanium oxide addition on some mechanical properties of silicone elastomers for maxillofacial prostheses.Journal of Taibah University Medical Sciences.2018 Jun 1;13(3):281–290.
3143533510.1016/j.jtumed.2018.02.007PMC6694880BalamuruganRMuruganandS:
Study of surface roughness by stylus profilometer and binary laser speckle B/D counting techniques.International Journal of Advanced Research in Electrical, Electronics and Instrumentation Engineering.2015 May;4(5):4559–4563.PhilipPJoseETChackoJK:
Preparation and characterisation of surface roughened PMMA electrospun nanofibers from PEO-PMMA polymer blend nanofibers.Polymer Testing.2019 Apr 1;74:257–265.
10.1016/j.polymertesting.2019.01.009GadMMFoudaSMAl-HarbiFA:
PMMA denture base material enhancement: a review of fiber, filler, and nanofiller addition.International Journal of Nanomedicine.2017 May 17;12:3801–3812.
2855311510.2147/IJN.S130722PMC5440038IsmailIJMuklifO:
Studying the effect of addition a composite of silanized Nano-Al2O3 and plasma treated polypropylene fibers on some physical and mechanical properties of heat cured PMMA denture base material.Journal of Baghdad College of Dentistry.2015;27(3):22–27.
10.12816/0015029HameedHKAbdul RahmanH:
The effect of addition nano particle ZrO2 on some properties of autoclave processed heat cures acrylic denture base material.Journal of Baghdad College of Dentistry.2015;27:32–39.
10.12816/0015262Ali SabriBSatgunamMAbreezaNM:
A review on enhancements of PMMA denture base material with different nano-fillers.Cogent Engineering.2021 Jan 1;8(1):1875968.
10.1080/23311916.2021.1875968Abdel-KarimUMEl-SaftySMKenawyER:
Surface roughness, hardness, color Stability, Water Sorption and Water Solubility of PMMA denture base Material reinforced with Synthesized inorganic, organic, and hybrid nanofibers.Egyptian Dental Journal.2018 Oct 1;64(4-October (Fixed Prosthodontics, Dental Materials, Conservative Dentistry & Endodontics)):3593–3608.AbdullahHAAbdul-AmeerFM:
Evaluation of some mechanical properties of a new silicone elastomer for maxillofacial prostheses after addition of intrinsic pigments.The Saudi Dental Journal.2018 Oct 1;30(4):330–336.
3020217010.1016/j.sdentj.2018.05.006PMC6128324AlqutaibiAYBaikAAlmuzainiSA:
Polymeric Denture Base Materials: A Review.Polymers.2023 Jul 31;15(15):3258.
3757115110.3390/polym15153258PMC10422349ShishehianAFirouzFKhazaeeS:
Evaluating the color stability of 3D-printed resins against various solutions.European Journal of Translational Myology.2023;33.
3776789110.4081/ejtm.2023.11493PMC10583149JoinerALuoW:
Tooth colour and whiteness: a review.Journal of Dentistry.2017;67:S3–S10.
10.1016/j.jdent.2017.09.006IhabNSHasanenKAAliNA:
Assessment of Zirconium Oxide Nano-Fillers Incorporation and Silanation on Impact, Tensile Strength and Color Alteration of Heat Polymerized Acrylic Resin.Journal of Baghdad College of Dentistry.2012;24:36–42.SafiINMoudhaffarM:
Evaluation the effect of modified nano fillers addition on some properties of heat cured acrylic denture base material.Journal of Baghdad College of Dentistry.2011;23:23–29.BaghaeiBSkrifvarsM:
All-cellulose composites: A review of recent studies on structure, properties and applications.Molecules.2020 Jun 19;25(12):2836.
3257555010.3390/molecules25122836PMC7356676FadhelMSafiI:
Evaluating the effect of the addition of Nano-Cellulose fibers on certain properties of heat-cured acrylic resin denture base material.[Dataset].
figshare.2024.
10.6084/m9.figshare.25048673.v110.5256/f1000research.161644.r289055Reviewer response for version 1AlawiRabihah1Referee
Universiti Sains Malaysia, Kubang Kerian, Kelantan, Malaysia
Competing interests: No competing interests were disclosed.
General comments: Generally, the authors have done studies on physical and mechanical testing on the PMMA incorporated with 0.5 and 1 wt % of CNF and presented the findings in the manuscript as attached. Upon review of the manuscript, there were comments on certain aspects of the writing as stated below. Proof reading is recommended to improve the quality of manuscript. Specific comments:
Title: Please be specific on which properties rather than certain properties
Abstract
Background: Highlight on the CNF in PMMA Methods: -remove this statement. This research examined the impact strength, transverse strength, surface hardness, surface roughness, and color stability of heat-cured acrylic denture base material after 0.5% and 1% by wt. CNFs were added. The tests were mentioned twice whereby all tests were mentioned again in the later part of the paragraph. Sample interactions and fiber dispersion were assessed using FTIR and FE-SEM should be stated in the testing part, before the statistical analysis. Revise sample interactions -statistical analysis, mention what type of statistical test was done and remove bar charts were used to visualize the results.
Results: Compared to the control group, 0.5% by wt. and 1% by wt. CNF improved the impact and transverse strength substantially PMMA with 0.5% wt and 1%wt please check for all and clearly state the results
Conclusions do not correspond to the findings in results.
Keywords: limit to five keywords, and avoid using abbreviations
Introduction: highlight how this study is different from the previous studies. Mention also the chemical interaction between PMMA heat-cured resin and CNFs was investigated in this study. Table 1: for pilot study, 1.5% CNF was also used, but not included in table 1 2.1 Study design 0.5, 1, 1.5, and 2 wt.% of CNFs were added to the resin. Please add For a pilot study, 0.5, 1, 1.5, and 2 wt.% of CNFs were added to the resin,.
Methodology: Explain CNF incorporation first, followed by sample preparation For the sample size of each test, under specific test subheading, please be consistent .for example, in the impact strength test, authors mentioned thirty samples were made in total, with ten serving as a control group and the remaining twenty being acrylic samples with varying concentrations of cellulose nanofibers added (0.5% and 1%). Then, for transverse strength test, authors mentioned thirty samples were made in total, with ten serving as a control group and the remaining twenty being acrylic samples with varying concentrations of cellulose nanofibers added; whereby percentage of CNF was not stated. And for all other tests, the sample size was not stated For transverse strength test, please mention manufacturer and country for instron machine used, rather than stated a standard Instron device. For statistical analysis, please revise the test used, t test is used for comparison between 2 groups.
Results: FTIR results, please label X and Y axis on the graph spectrum and highlight the areas of interest for the interaction SEM images, please add bar scale on images SEM, images for samples with 0.5 %wt and 1.5%wt were attached rather than than 0.5%wt and 1.0%wt 1.5% was used for pilot study The nano size of CNF would be better measured using TEM.
Discussion The OH bending vibration at 1606 cm-1 in the CNF spectrum appeared as a new peak after the addition of fibers to the polymer owing to the interaction the OH- functional groups of the CNFs with each other to form physical blending, and the interaction with each (O) pair\ electron in PMMA, as shown in Figure 3.please revise this statement as interaction of electron cannot be seen on FTIR spectrum. Comparison to the studies on silicon seems to be inappropriate, would be better to compare how the PPMA was reinforced in the previous studies, if available. Using natural resources. Agglomeration and poor distribution of nanofibers was noted in 1.5% CNFs, as shown in Figure 4 (G&H).why discussed for sample used in pilot studies?
Conclusion Please revise the conclusion; eg: Incorporating different weight percentages of cellulose nanofibers (0.5-1%) wt. into heat-cured denture base material significantly improved some of its mechanical properties. Please revise, as this study used 0.5% and 1% wt only The increase was directly proportional to the concentration of the nanofibers, and was within an acceptable clinical range, please revise this conclusion as the acceptable clinical range was not discussed or mentioned earlier part of the manuscript. FTIR analysis demonstrated highly physical blending between the CNFs and the heat-cured acrylic denture base material. Please revise this conclusion.
Is the work clearly and accurately presented and does it cite the current literature?
Partly
If applicable, is the statistical analysis and its interpretation appropriate?
Partly
Are all the source data underlying the results available to ensure full reproducibility?
Yes
Is the study design appropriate and is the work technically sound?
Partly
Are the conclusions drawn adequately supported by the results?
Partly
Are sufficient details of methods and analysis provided to allow replication by others?
Partly
Reviewer Expertise:
Biomaterials
I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard, however I have significant reservations, as outlined above.
10.5256/f1000research.161644.r289060Reviewer response for version 1AlkhafagyMohammed1Refereehttps://orcid.org/0000-0003-4336-0340
University of Kufa, Najaf, Iraq
Competing interests: No competing interests were disclosed.
{Figure 4. FE-SEM micrograph (A and B) cellulose nanofibers powder at 25000 and 110 000 magnification; (C and D) heat cured acrylic resin controlled specimens at 1000 and 4000 magnification respectively; (E and F) acrylic specimens reinforced with 0.5% CNF at 1000 and 4000 magnification; (G and H) specimens rein[1]forced with
1.5% CNF at 1000x and 4} should change to
1%
2- In page no.12
{FE-SEM demonstrated that a 0.5% CNF concentration was well-dispersed and agglomeration-free, as shown in Figure 4 (E&F). Agglomeration and poor distribution of nanofibers was noted in
1.5% CNFs, as shown in Figure 4 (G&H).} should change to
1%
Is the work clearly and accurately presented and does it cite the current literature?
Yes
If applicable, is the statistical analysis and its interpretation appropriate?
I cannot comment. A qualified statistician is required.
Are all the source data underlying the results available to ensure full reproducibility?
Yes
Is the study design appropriate and is the work technically sound?
Yes
Are the conclusions drawn adequately supported by the results?
Yes
Are sufficient details of methods and analysis provided to allow replication by others?
Yes
Reviewer Expertise:
Prosthodontic Dentistry and Dental materials
I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard.