Talk:Biodegradable plastic

Changes made: These also are the criteria used by the Biodegradble Products Institute to certify that a plastic will biodegrade in a compost environment without environmental side-effects . ^[2] (Environmental Side-Effects) # PLA/ethanol is creating more global warming pollution than gasoline according to the Environmental Defense Org., November, 2007.

1. GMO corn kills the larvae of beneficial pollinators, including the Monarch butterfly, and other beneficial insects. It fails, for example, to kill the African Cotton Worm, but kills the beneficial Green Lacewing that eats Cotton Worms. Insects develop resistance to the engineered Bt toxin over time, threatening to render natural Bt sprays useless for organic farmers — a tool allowed as a last resort.
2. GMO corn threatens organic farmers and a sustainable environment. Pollen drift and genetic contamination reduce biodiversity. (Packaging and Plastics, July, 2006, by Natalie Reitman-White and Bob Doppelt
3. A recent article from the World Bank states that 75% of the increase in food prices is because of corn used for biofuels. The US claims of 3% are way off. One would also have to include any corn based plastics as they are also using corn that would normally be used for food. The Guardian; July 4, 2008, Aditya Chakrabortty
4. Smithfield Foods’ CEO C. Larry Pope, stated that the problems his company currently face are due to the high cost of corn, not to the recession. “Profits are down because of the recession. We’d be doing fine if corn prices hadn’t skyrocketed.” The Virginia-Pilot, Feb. 12, 2009
5. NatureWorks has been cited by the state of Nebraska for air pollution. They were guilty of emitting organic compounds (VOC) and hazardous air pollutants above the permitted levels- Plastic News, Dec., 2006.

(Biodegradable Products Institute is not a governing authority, this is an advertisement for their $4,800 Logo Program, a non profit that outsources all of their testing to accredited labs on the ASTM D6400 and D6868) (Personal Opinions, non science based) There is no scientific definition for biodegradable plastics only compostable in an industrial compost(Incorrect read ASTM D5511) although various researchers may claim that plastics with different rates of biodegradation (from months to years) are biodegradable for marketing purposes only(Incorrect and non science based). No additive base plastic currently meets these mainstream definitions of biodegradble / compostable to include biobatch and oxodegradable additives (Incorrect biobatch does, please read the ASTM D5511 method, which is the same as the D5338 method which the ASTM D6400 standard references, please review)^[3]

(Incorrect the ASTM D5511) Because of various temperature, humidity and microbial environments in landfills there is not test that will ensure a compostable plastic will biodegrade in a landfill. For example what may biodegrade in Florida in the summer may not in an Alaskan winter so the ASTM D20 committee on plastics had not published a definition of biodegrade in a landfill Once again the D5511 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Callsign (talk • contribs) 07:24, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

To provide scientific standards for biodegradable plastics, the Biodegradable Products Institute (BPI) was established in 1999. The BPI is a multi-stakeholder association comprising representatives of government, industry and academia. The BPI is open to any materials and products that demonstrate that they meet the requirements in ASTM D6400 or D6868, based on testing in a BPI-approved laboratory.

(ADVERTISMENT, NON Government based)(NON Biodegradable, Please post in compostable plastics section)(Please read FTC guidelines for Biodegradable, Compostable)

Removed Link (Biodegradable Products Institute) Wiki rules of advertising

NUMEROUS SPELLING ERRORS by BPI poster

Added

EcoPure from Bio-Tec attracts the microbes to the molecular structure by allowing the hydrocarbons to be sensed once again by microbial colonies. When oil is in the ground the microbes attach themselves onto the hydrocarbons consuming the oil and creating natural gas, 50% of which is methane gas. When the oil is cracked 4% is used for the plastic industry, if the plastic industry did not use this 4% the 4% would be considered waste and be thrown away or removed and dumped into a a waste disposal facility, another 4% is used in the generation of your consumer product. During this phase of cracking the organic compound which attracts the microbes to the molecular structure of the plastic is burnt out. The organic compound which is burnt out and other proprietary compounds which increase quorum sensing of the microbes and Ph balance for the microbes are placed into the molecular structure of the plastic once again.[10]

REF body of Bio-Tec, their patented technology —Preceding unsigned comment added by Callsign (talk • contribs) 06:09, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

There should be a section listing plastics in this category. I've found the following partial list:

• polybutylene adipate/terephthalate
• polybutylene succinate
• polybutylene succinate/adipate
• polybutylene succinate/carbonate
• polybutylene succinate terephthalate
• polytetramethylene adipate/terephthalate
• polycaprolactone

-- Dougher (talk) 01:53, 17 July 2009 (UTC) I can add to this. It may take me some time, it may be good to reference the body of the Australian committee around Biopolymers. They do have an in-depth study.

I will post the link here. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Callsign (talk • contribs) 06:12, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

http://www.environment.gov.au/settlements/publications/waste/degradables/biodegradable/chapter3.html

I came here looking for timescales for biodegradation. How long does it take typical biodegradable, oxo-degradable and non-degradable materials to degrade in aerobic and anaerobic environments? The only clue in the article is the sentence "Disposing of biodegradable plastics made from natural materials in anaerobic (landfill) environments will result in the plastic lasting for hundred of years." Rough orders of magnitude (years, 10s of years, 100s of years, etc.) would do. 79.199.61.21 (talk) 06:31, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

True biodegradation time scales are very difficult. Allot of companies like to try and give a time frame to biodegradation, but it depends on various things such as surface area(microbes attaching themselves onto the surface, would one like to climb a rock wall with rocks, or a smooth surface, microbes work the same) as well as thickness or gram weight for carbon loss. It is almost impossible to give an exact time frame of a generic plastic product. You would need to perform a basic weight loss analysis or a gel perm test. Weight loss is around 500 bucks and Gel is 2K.

For the US to meet its current output of plastics production with BPs, it would require 1.62 square meters per kilogram produced[25].

That sounds far too low to be true. Maybe it should read "1.62 square kilometers per kilogram produced"? Also it seems that a unit of time is missing -> "per kilogram produced per year"? Can anyone with access to the cited source check what it says there? --Chrissi (talk) 16:04, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

Please note that this page has been altered to delete all mention of alternatives to compostable plastics. This revision omits all reference to competing technologies, which include entire categories of biodegradable plastics. Two categories which have been omitted are oxo-biodegradable plastics and micro-biodegradable plastics. It seems likely that this edit of this Wikipedia entry has been made by those holding financial interests in 'compostable' plastics such as polylactic acid, or PLA. Companies which recently heavily lobbied for PLA in the below discussed California legislature include Cargill, Incorporated, doing business as under the name of its wholly owned subsidiary, Nature Works, and Archer Daniels Midland. Cargill has frequently been described as a bad corporate citizen, and it has been accused of many violations of labor and safety laws in many countries. The PLA lobby maintains a website devoted wholly to serving its interests, which describes legitimate alternatives to its technology as being scams and frauds at http://greenwashingspy.com -and it seems likely that this edit of this entry is a part of the same disinformation campaign by the PLA lobby. It may be also connected to a lobbying organization which has misrepresented itself as an environmental organization, the Biodegradable Products Institute, or BPI. For an contrasting view of the subject of biodegradable plastics, see . According to information on that website, to replace the disposable plastic items discarded in the United States with plastics based on corn, it would take enough grain to feed over one third of the world's hungry people, if it were made of PLA sourced corn. It may reasonably be inferred that profits despite massive humanitarian consequences are the goal of the PLA lobby and the corn lobby of which it is a subset. Biofuels made from corn promoted by the corn lobby have already been implicated in increasing world hunger by the United Nations. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Junket76 (talk • contribs)

Changes made to this content, Scientific Definitions should not have a bill passed by California Legislation. Please place in the correct area on the page. Callsign (talk) 19:52, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

Citation is an unreliable source REF 10, it has no bearing as it is a 3rd party trade organization promoting their certifications.Callsign (talk) 23:36, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

The citation numbers change, so please provide the full name of the reference. Wizard191 (talk) 15:04, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

Ingeo and Mirel were removed because they are Trade Names and advertising their products.

PLA is the resin for INGEO and PHA is the resin for Mirel Callsign (talk) 23:40, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

There is another contradiction here: 'Biodegradable plastics are plastics that will decompose in natural aerobic (composting) and anaerobic (landfill) environments.' (first line of first paragraoh in introduction/background) and 'However, certified biodegradable plastics require a specific environment of moisture and oxygen to biodegrade, conditions found in professionally managed composting facilities.' (first line of second paragraph under the section 'Environmental benefits of biodegradable plastics depend upon proper disposal') — Preceding unsigned comment added by 175.156.201.217 (talk) 14:16, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

I came across this page and a few things raised some concerns for me. While I am barely starting out as a wikipedia editor, and while I really do want biodegradable plastics to succeed, I feel like this article downplays many problems with biodegradable plastics and reads like an article of persuasion. Part of the problem is many of the criticisms are hidden under a section titled "Environmental benefits of biodegradable plastics depend upon proper disposal." Also, in some places, the article sets up a problem or concern, and then gives an answer or solution to show that the problem is not real or important. I feel like it is overall unbalanced and persuasive, and I'd like a few impartial and more experienced editors to weigh in on if it really is the case.

Thanks, Semitones (talk) 17:20, 13 November 2011 (UTC)

I feel the same, the article is a mass of uncited cruft, but the process was closer to this: Someone makes an uncited claim. Someone else comes and edits in "However, ...," then a third person joins in with "But that's unimportant because...," as if each sentence was a forum post, leaving us with a garbage article that is unscientific, unencyclopedic, and terribly written. Then the Environmental benefits and Environmental concerns sections essentially repeat the same arguments. It's hard to tell what's important because multiple people have made the article too wishy-washy to mean anything. It desperately needs an expert. Foxyshadis^(talk) 19:51, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

Removed the confusion between Compostable and Biodegradable, these are 2 separate ways to claim your products. Compostable means to throw away in a compost pile and does not mean that it is biodegradable in any way. On another note, compostable is meant for a compost facility above 140 F when biodegradable is meant for anything at 50 F, there is a big difference between above 50 F and below 50 F, due to the microbial activity. Microbes are increased reaction with every 18 F according to the EPA and CDC, this allows the compostable products to break down in compost and the biodegradable products to break down in natural environments such as a landfill. The mezophilic temperatures and the thermophilic temperatures as well define the types of microbes that live in those environments. The environments of compostable are defined as fungi's(Aerobic) and the environments of biodegradable are defined as bacteria(Anaerobic), these are different types or classes of microbes and therefore breakdown different substances, Fungi does not need 140 F to live nor does bacteria, they both can live at 140F, but Fungi needs free flowing oxygen and bacteria does not.(AKA thats why you get a virus(Bacteria) and Rashes(Fungus) — Preceding unsigned comment added by GGIwin (talk • contribs) 06:05, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

Removed stories of plastic eating microbes to take over cities, this is false, microbes exist to consume plastic according to numerous studies, anaerobic and oceanic microbes that consume hydrocarbons. — Preceding unsigned comment added by GGIwin (talk • contribs) 06:31, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

The source of the cited quotation is www.compostable.info, a website about the Canadian Certification Program for compostable plastic bags which is an initiative of The Compost Council of Canada, not the plastics industry. The definitions listed on the website seem to be provided merely to establish a basic terminology, as the criteria that have to be met in order to be certified for the mark of conformity "COMPOSTABLE" are not set by the ASTM definition but by the documents BNQ 9011-911/2007 and CAN/BNQ 0017-988. One of these requirements is that germination rate of seeds and rate of plant growth must be within 10% of the rates obtained on "normal" compost.
Other labels have other standards, and may or may not represent the plastics industry. For example the Biodegradable Products Institute is a label used in the US. To judge the merits of such labels one should examine the requirements and test procedures.
To determine whether these labels' use of the term "compostable" differs significantly from the accepted definition of the word, one would first have to show that such a generally accepted definition exists. Neither this article nor the compostable article provides a reliable source for that. Ssscienccce (talk) 08:59, 16 September 2012 (UTC)

Deleted the ridiculous definition of changing plastic to it's base components. Biodegradation has always meant capable of being decomposed by bacteria or other living organisms. If you can't read a dictionary one will be provided to you. ^[1]— Preceding unsigned comment added by GGIwin (talk • contribs) 23:07, 20 April 2013 (UTC)

I appreciate the work that went into including the "Hydrocarbon Eating Microbes" list, but I'm not sure that a list of 116 genera belongs in an encyclopaedia entry, especially unsourced. This seems like information for a microbiology database, not an introduction to biodegradable plastics, especially when the list is not introduced or referenced in any article text, and determining its relevance is left up to the reader.Nsteinberg (talk) 00:19, 28 April 2013 (UTC)

I agree that the list is too indiscriminate as presented relative to the topic. I've removed this section from the article. Below is a copy of what was removed. Northamerica1000^(talk) 12:44, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

Hydrocarbon Eating Microbes

"OBD plastics may produce tiny fragments of plastic that do not continue to degrade"

How many molecules of plastic in a typical plastic bag..? Trillions? So after a grocery bag "bio-degrades", then instead of one discrete plastic bag in the environment, there are trillions of individual plastic molecules. That seems infinitely more hazardous and insidious than a single pastic bag.

This point isn't stressed nearly enough in the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.208.71.221 (talk) 21:01, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

I added a citation to the section of Environmental benefits, because there was a suggestion for a citation there. I then realized the sentence was directly quoted from many sources, so I found an article discussing the topic and rephrased the sentence so that it wouldn't be copying the article. The article I used as the citation is here: http://www.mpponline.in/european-parliament-committee-vote-for-100-biodegradable-plastic-bags/ The sentence I rephrased was this: It takes 2.65 kg (5.8 lb) of corn to make 1 kg (2.2 lb) of polylactic acid, the most common commercially compostable plastic. Telupei (talk) 00:06, 22 March 2015 (UTC)

Has there been study into the new plastics with regards to gasses they emit during first ~10 years in use. In some climates most residential buildings have negative air pressure to keep moisture in check. In this case, the gasses get pulled due to the pressure from the plastics into the air. Plastics, glues in carpets, electronics, even "paper" magazines continuously outgas even after *years*. I have "found" that new consumer products, paints seem more prone to these problems than those used 20-30 years ago - based on buying a whole lot of electronic gadgets in last 30 years, the frequency of those things smelling has increased. Now some even use "deodorizer" chemicals to mask away the problem.

http://www.arb.ca.gov/research/seminars/mckone/mckone.pdf

See this PDF for some study into what stuff can come out of electronics. My pet issue are keyboards, some of the new ones I've tried make breathing difficult if the room air circulation under your nose is poor - if the circulation is high, then I get dry eyes because of the heating needed to warm up the winter air. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.155.31.86 (talk) 06:11, 28 January 2016‎ (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Biodegradable plastic. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110718081923/http://woohooreport.com/2009/09/wci-student-isolates-microbe-that-lunches-on-plastic-bags/ to http://woohooreport.com/2009/09/wci-student-isolates-microbe-that-lunches-on-plastic-bags/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:00, 20 July 2017 (UTC)

There's several downsides to biodegradeable plastics (lifespan, physical properties, etc.) so why aren't they mentioned?Rody1990 (talk) 11:51, 8 June 2018 (UTC)

Regulation section of this article needs to explore different countries. This will provide readers will a balanced overview when considering world perspective on biodegradable plastic. Only have the United States as the control can be detrimental as it gives a bias persepctive .

Manon1998 (talk) 08:27, 20 August 2018 (UTC)

The following Wikipedia contributor may be personally or professionally connected to the subject of this article. Relevant policies and guidelines may include conflict of interest, autobiography, and neutral point of view. [[User:{{{1}}}|{{{1}}}]] ([[User talk:{{{1}}}|talk]] · [[Special:Contribs/{{{1}}}|contribs]])

This edit request by an editor with a conflict of interest was declined. The request was not specific enough. You may consider leaving your comments on the Talk page or escalating significant issues to the conflict of interest noticeboard.

Information to be added or removed:

Processing considerations

A study by the Federal Ministry of Food and Agriculture in Germany examined the manufacturability of biodegradable plastics as compared to conventional plastics based on processing parameters such as shrinkage behavior, plasticizing capacity and processing temperature for injection molding. The study found that, overall, the processing of biodegradable plastics is similar to that of conventional plastics and reasonable cycle times can be achieved.

As with switching from one conventional plastic to another, though, switching to bioplastics requires the injection molder to make material-specific modifications to their processing parameters. For example, an injection molder might need to dry the plastic prior to processing, lower processing temperatures or adjust the cavity parameters to account for different shrinkage behaviors between the two materials.

While pre-drying is a key processing consideration for all bioplastics, it is critical for biodegradable plastics. Excess moisture present in biodegradable plastics will not only cause processing problems (i.e., decreased mechanical performance and increased melt index), but the moisture may cause hydrolysis in the material resulting in a loss of molecular weight while the product is in use. To prevent such issues, the processing recommendations set forth by the biodegradable plastic manufacturer should always be followed.

A common misconception is that biodegradable plastics, as a category, exhibit a narrow range of physical properties. In reality, material manufacturers are now capable of alloying and blending biodegradable polymers (e.g., PLA, PBS, PBAT, etc.) to meet specific performance parameters without sacrificing compostability. The percent elongation of PLA, a generally rigid polymer, can be increased as much as 18.7% when compounded with a compostable elastomeric bioplastic. Using the same impact modifier, the impact strength of PLA can be increased more than 400%.

Explanation of issue: While this page gives an in-depth look at a lot of sub-topics within biodegradable plastic, processing considerations are not discussed. Since biodegradables have different processing requirements, adding a detailed section allows the reader to achieve a more holistic understanding of the topic. References supporting change: https://www.ifbb-hannover.de/files/IfBB/downloads/EV_Processing-of-Bioplastics-2016.pdf

76wikibananas (talk) 16:52, 8 November 2018 (UTC)

The following Wikipedia contributor may be personally or professionally connected to the subject of this article. Relevant policies and guidelines may include conflict of interest, autobiography, and neutral point of view. [[User:{{{1}}}|{{{1}}}]] ([[User talk:{{{1}}}|talk]] · [[Special:Contribs/{{{1}}}|contribs]])

This edit request by an editor with a conflict of interest was declined.

Information to be added or removed: Please add the below section ("Processing considerations for biodegradable plastics") using this study as a reference.

Explanation of issue: While this page gives an in-depth look at a lot of sub-topics within biodegradable plastics, processing considerations of these polymers are not discussed. This section gives detailed processing considerations (specifically for injection molding) of common biodegradable polymers. It uses the processing considerations of conventional plastics as a point of comparison, drawing on findings from this detailed study on the processing characteristics of biodegradable plastics.

There is a good discussion of oxo-degradable plastics under 'controversy', which seems the right place. But the little section about oxo-degradable plastics under 'standards' doesn't seem to belong there. Propose to merge its content with the former section? Randywombat (talk) 16:00, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

@Randywombat: At first I put all the oxo-biodegradable text under "Environmental concerns" but then after looking at it, I decided that your proposal is better.

One thing missing from this article are examples of oxo-biodegradable plastics. I think PLA might be one (I am not sure), but that's listed in the "Types" section under another heading. If you can clarify that, please do. ~Anachronist (talk) 15:56, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

Great, thanks. I’ll have a look. Randywombat (talk) 12:34, 16 January 2021 (UTC)

The second paragraph of the lead as of Jan 22, 2022 starts by marking the distinction between "biodegradable plastic" (e.g. degrades in grass) and "bioplastic" (e.g. made from grass). It spends the final two sentences discussing bioplastics, which are not the focus of this article. Reproduced below:

While the words "bioplastic" and "biodegradable plastic" are similar, they are not synonymous. Not all bioplastics (plastics derived partly or entirely from biomass[3]) are biodegradable, and some biodegradable plastics are fully petroleum based.[4] As more companies are keen to be seen as having "Green" credentials, solutions such as using bioplastics are being investigated and implemented more. However there are many skeptics who believe that bioplastics will not solve problems others expect.[5]

Pentane5 (talk) 17:57, 22 January 2022 (UTC)

What's the difference between the subject of this article and biodegradable polymer? Are they duplicating the same subject?

The hatnote here said For information on plastics designed to biodegrade in human bodies, see Biodegradable polymer., but the linked article opens with a picture of some cutlery, and only includes medicine as a subsection much later on. Belbury (talk) 14:54, 9 September 2023 (UTC)

@Belbury: I only just now noticed the biodegradable polymer article now that you mentioned it. I removed the nonsensical lead image. It seems there is some overlap between the two topics; for example polylactic acid is described in both articles. ~Anachronist (talk) 17:33, 9 September 2023 (UTC)

The following text, lightly supported by weak citations, was removed by me. It seems tangential. "Biodegradable Conducting Polymers (CPs) are a polymeric material designed for applications within the human body. Important properties of this material are its electrical conductivity comparable to traditional conductors and its biodegradability. The medical applications of biodegradable CPs are attractive to medical specialties such as tissue engineering and regenerative medicine.<ref name=":8">{{cite journal |last1=Liu |first1=Bin |title=Recent Advances in Biodegradable Conducting Polymers and Their Biomedical Applications |journal=Biomacromolecules |date=11 June 2018 |volume=19 |issue=6 |pages=1783–1803 |doi=10.1021/acs.biomac.8b00275 |pmid=29787260 }}</ref> In tissue engineering, the key focus is on providing damaged organs with physicochemical cues to damaged organs for repair. This is achieved through use of nanocomposite scaffolding.<ref name=":9" /> Regenerative medicine applications are designed to regenerate cells along with improving the repair process of the body.<ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Mao|first1=Angelo S.|last2=Mooney|first2=David J.|date=2015-11-24|title=Regenerative medicine: Current therapies and future directions|journal=Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America|volume=112|issue=47|pages=14452–14459|doi=10.1073/pnas.1508520112|issn=0027-8424|pmc=4664309|pmid=26598661|bibcode=2015PNAS..11214452M|doi-access=free}}</ref> The use of biodegradable CPs can also be implemented into biomedical imaging along with implants, and more.<ref name=":8" /> The design of biodegradable CPs began with the blending of biodegradable polymers including polylactides, polycaprolactone, and polyurethanes. This design triggered innovation into what is being engineered as of the year 2019. The current biodegradable CPs is applicable for use in the biomedical field. The compositional architecture of current biodegradable CPs includes the conductivity properties of oligomer-based biodegradable polymers implemented into compositions of linear, starshaped, or hyperbranched formations. Another implementation to enhance the biodegradable architecture of the CPs is by use of monomers and conjugated links that are degradable.<ref name=":8" /> The biodegradable polymers used in biomedical applications typically consist of hydrolyzable esters and hydrazones. These molecules, upon external stimulation, go on to be cleaved and broken down. The cleaving activation process can be achieved through use of an acidic environment, increasing the temperature, or by use of enzymes.<ref name=":8" /> Three categories of biodegradable CP composites have been established in relation to their chemistry makeup. The first category includes partially biodegradable CP blends of conductive and biodegradable polymeric materials. The second category includes conducting oligomers of biodegradable CPs. The third category is that of modified and degradable monpmer units along with use of degradable conjugated links for use in biodegradable CPs polymers.<ref name=":8" /><ref name=":9">{{cite journal |last1=Yadid |first1=Moran |last2=Feiner |first2=Ron |last3=Dvir |first3=Tal |title=Gold Nanoparticle-Integrated Scaffolds for Tissue Engineering and Regenerative Medicine |journal=Nano Letters |date=18 March 2019 |volume=19 |issue=4 |pages=2198–2206 |doi=10.1021/acs.nanolett.9b00472 |pmid=30884238 |bibcode=2019NanoL..19.2198Y |s2cid=83460782 }}</ref>"--Smokefoot (talk) 04:43, 19 January 2026 (UTC)