Submitted:
23 April 2026
Posted:
24 April 2026
You are already at the latest version
Abstract
Keywords:
1. Introduction

2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Plant Material Preparation
2.2. Fiber Extraction Methods
2.2.2. Chemical Extraction Method (Cold Alkaline Treatment)
2.2.3. Manual Extraction (Scraping Method)
2.3. Characterization
2.3.1. Scanning Electron Microscopy (SEM)
2.3.2. Fourier Transform Infrared Spectroscopy (FTIR)
2.3.3. X-Ray Diffraction (XRD)
2.3.4. The Measurement of Chemical Composition.
2.3.5. Tensile Tests
2.3.6. Density Determination

2.3.7. Moisture Content
2.3.8. Weight Loss Rate
2.3.9. Inductive Coupled Plasma Emission Spectrometer (ICP-MS) Detection
2.3.10. Thermal Analysis
2.3.11. Statistical Analysis
3. Results and Discussion
3.1. Morphology Studies
3.2. Fourier Transform Infrared Spectroscopy (FTIR) Analysis of the Molokhia Fibers
3.3. X-Ray Diffraction (XRD) Analysis
3.4. Chemical Composition
3.5. Physical and Mechanical Properties
3.6. Effect of Fiber Extraction Methods on Weight Loss Rate
- Biological Retting Method: The weight loss of Molokhia fibers subjected to biological retting increased progressively from 59.70% to 71.40% as the retting duration extended from 15 to 21 days, followed by a slight decrease to 70.50% at 23 days. This trend reflects the microbial degradation of pectin, hemicellulose, and other non-cellulosic materials, leading to fiber separation (Di Candilo et al., 2010)[107]. The observed plateau and minor decline after 21 days suggest that most soluble binding compounds were already decomposed, consistent with previous findings highlighting diminishing returns with prolonged retting (Akin, 2010) [108]. The optimal extraction point, therefore, was identified at 21 days, indicating maximum removal of unwanted components such as pectin, waxes, and lignin, beyond which fiber deterioration may occur due to overexposure to microbial activity.
- Chemical Extraction Method: In the chemical extraction process, weight loss showed a sharp increase from 50.72% (Day 3) to 80.70% (Day 9), with marginal change afterward (80.53% at Day 11), indicating a rapid and efficient dissolution of non-cellulosic constituents by chemical agents like NaOH or H₂SO₄ (Reddy & Yang, 2019) [109]. This stabilization implies that by Day 9, most of the amorphous and matrix-binding materials had been removed, in agreement with literature suggesting that extending chemical treatments beyond optimal duration offers no significant improvement in yield (Reddy & Yang, 2005) [68]. Although efficient, prolonged chemical exposure may adversely affect fiber integrity, including surface morphology, tensile strength, and stiffness.
- Manual Extraction Method: Manual extraction resulted in a fixed weight loss of 64.60%, placing it between biological and chemical methods. This mechanical separation technique, while less efficient in removing residual non-cellulosic matter, helps maintain fiber structure and reduces the risk of chemical or microbial degradation. These observations are aligned with previous studies (Akhtar et al., 2018) [116], which confirmed that manual methods preserve tensile strength but leave behind more impurities due to limited removal capacity.
- Chemical extraction provides the highest yield in the shortest time,
- Biological retting ensures gradual and eco-friendly separation with optimal results at 21 days,
- Manual methods offer structural preservation but moderate extraction efficiency.
3.7. Analysis of Heavy Metals
3.8. Thermal Degradation Analysis of Molokhia Fibers (TGA)
- Home & apparel textiles (woven/knits, household fabrics):
- 2.
- Technical/home textiles (upholstery, curtains, interior panels):≤120 °C continuous; ≤140–150 °C short-term (Pickering et al., 2016) [125].
- 3.
- Automotive/interior trim & semi-structural panels (non-engine bay):
- 4.
- 4- Protective clothing (not for high-heat/thermal exposure):
- 5.
- Polymer Composite Processing Windows
- -
- Thermoplastics:
- -
- Thermosets (epoxy/polyester/vinyl ester):
- -
- Practical Notes
3.9. Linking Molokhia Fiber Extraction Method to Potential End-Uses:
4. Conclusions
Funding
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Ali, A.; Shaker, K.; Nawab, Y.; Ashraf, M.; Basit, A.; Shahid, S.; Umair, M. Impact of hydrophobic treatment of jute on moisture regain and mechanical properties of composite material. J. Reinf. Plast. Compos. 2015, 34, 2059–2068. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ameer, M. H.; Shaker, K.; Ashraf, M.; Karahan, M.; Nawab, Y.; Ahmad, S.; Ali Nasir, M. Interdependence of moisture, mechanical properties, and hydrophobic treat- ment of jute fibre-reinforced composite materials. J.Text. Inst. 2017, 108, 1768–1776. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Koyuncu, M.; Karahan, N.; Shaker, K.; Nawab, Y. Static and dynamic mechanical properties of cotton/epoxy green composites. Fibres Text. East. Eur. 2016, 24, 105–111. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nawab, Y.; Kashif, M.; Asghar, M. A.; Asghar, A.; Umair, M.; Shaker, K.; Zeeshan, M. Development characterization of green composites using novel 3D woven preforms. Appl. Compos. Mater. 2018, 25, 747–759. Available online: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10443-018-9720-2. [CrossRef]
- d’Almeida, J. R. M.; Aquino, R.C.M.P.; Monteiro, S. N. Tensile mechanical proper- ties, morphological aspects and chemical characterization of piassava (Attalea funi- fera) fibers. Compos. Part A Appl. Sci. Manuf. 2006, 37, 1473–1479. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Huber, T.; Müssig, J.; Curnow, O.; Pang, S.; Bickerton, S.; Staiger, M.P. A critical review of allcellulose composites. J. Mater. Sci. 2011, 47, 1171–1186. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Eyupoglu, S.; Eyupoglu, C.; Merdan, N. Extraction and characterization of novel cellulosic fiber from Phytolacca americana plant stem. Biomass Convers. Biorefnery 2025, 4259–4268. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Eyupoglu, S.; Eyupoglu, C.; Merdan, N. Characterization of a novel natural plant-based fber from reddish shell bean as a potential reinforcement in bio-composites. Biomass Convers. Biorefnery 2024, 15, 4259–4268. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Eyupoglu, S.; Eyupoglu, C.; Merdan, N. Investigation of the effect of enzymatic and alkali treatments on the physico-chemical properties of Sambucus ebulus L. plant fiber. Int. J. Biol. Macromol. 2024, 266(2), 130968. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Eyupoglu, S.; Eyupoglu, C. Investigation of a New Natural Cellulosic Fiber Extracted from Beetroot Plant. J. Nat. Fibers 2022, 19(16), 13852–13863. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Eyupoglu, S.; Merdan, N. Investigation of the Characteristic and Sound Absorption Properties of a New Cellulose-based Fiber from Alcea rose L. Plant. J. Nat. Fibers 2022, 19(15), 10082–10093. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tiwari, Y. M.; Sarangi, S. K.; Singh, A. K.; Senthamaraikannan, P.; Suyambulingam, I.; Kumar, R. Mechanical, Morphological and Hygroscopic Characterization of Bio-Composites Reinforced with Untreated and Alkali-Treated Grewia flavescens Fibers. J. Nat. Fibers 2025, 22(1), 2502649. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Joe, M. S.; Sudherson, D. P. S.; Suyambulingam, I.; Senthamaraikannan, P.; Kumar, R. Characterization of Ficus benjamina L. Aerial Root Fiber Reinforced Polyester Composite. J. Nat. Fibers 2025, 22, 1, 2475158. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Velmurugan, T.; Priyadharshini, G. S.; Senthamaraikannan, P.; Suyambulingam, I. Extraction and characterization of Martynia annua stem fiber as reinforcement for prospective application. Biomass Conversion and Biorefnery. 2025. Available online: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s13399-025-06719-x.
- Loumerem, M.; Alercia, A. Descriptors for jute (Corchorus olitorius L.) Genet Resour. Crop Evol. 2016, 63, 1103–1111. Available online: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10722-016-0415-y. [CrossRef]
- Kundu, A.; Sarkar, D.; Mandal, N.A.; Sinha, M.K.; Mahapatra, B.S. A secondary phloic (bast) fibre-shy (bfs) mutant of dark jute (Corchorus olitorius L.) develops lignified fibre cells but is defective in cambial activity. Plant Growth Regul. 2012, 67, 45–55. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tulio, A.Z.; Ose, K.; Chachin, K.; Ueda, Y. Effects of storage temperatures on the postharvest quality of jute leaves(Corchorus olitorius L.). Postharvest Biol. Technol. 2002, 26, 329–38. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Abdelmouleh, M.; Boufi, S.; Belgacem, M. N.; Dufresne, A. Short natural-fibre reinforced polyethylene and natural rubber composites: effect of silane coupling agents and ibres loading. Compos. Sci. Technol. 2007, 67, 1627–1639. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Paridah, M. T.; Ahmed, A. B.; SaifulAzry, S. O. A.; Ahmed, Z. Retting process of some bast plant fibres and its effect on fibre quality: A review. BioResources 2011, 6(4), 5260–5281. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Xue Li, Tabil, L.G., Panigrahi, S. Chemical Treatments of Natural Fiber for Use in Natural Fiber-Reinforced Composites: A Review. J. Polym. Environ. 2007, 15, 25–33. [CrossRef]
- Angulu, M.; Gusovius, H.-J. Retting of Bast Fiber Crops Like Hemp and Flax—A Review for Classification of Procedures. Fibers 2024, 12(3), 28. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Topics, ScienceDirect. Fibre Extraction - an overview. 2025. Available online: https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/engineering/fibre-extraction.
- de Morais Teixeira, E.; Correˆa, A.; Manzoli, A.; de Lima Leite, F.; de Oliveira, C.; Mattoso, L. Cellulose nanofibers from white and naturally colored cotton fibers. Cellulose 2010, 17)3, 595–606. Available online: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10570-010-9403-0. [CrossRef]
- Li, R.; Fei, J.; Cai, Y.; Li, Y.; Feng, J.; Yao, J. Cellulose whiskers extracted from mulberry: a novel biomass production. Carbohydr. Polym. 2009, 76(1), 94–99. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- ASTM D 1106-96; Standard test method for lignin in wood. American Society for Testing and Materials: Philadelphia PA, 1974.
- ASTM D1102-84; Standard test method for ash in wood. American Society forTesting and Materials: Philadelphia PA, 2007.
- ASTM C1557-20; Standard Test Method for Tensile Strength and Young’s Modulus of Fibers. ASTM International: West Conshohocken, PA, USA, 2017.
- Fidelis, M. E. A.; Pereira, T. V. C.; Gomes, O. F. M.; Silva, F. A.; Filho, R. D. T. The effect of fiber morphology on the tensile strength of natural fibers. J. Mater. Res. Technol. 2013, 2, 149–157. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Truong, M.; Zhong, W.; Boyko, S.; Alcock, M. A comparative study on natural fibre density measurement. J. Text. Inst. 2009, 100, 525–529. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Testing of plastics; determination of water absorption. 04 1984. Available online: https://www.dinmedia.de/en/standard/din-53495/1105684.
- Li, Zhengfan; Zou, Yanling; Li, Siyu; Guo, Yuwei; Zeng, Xinyi; Zhu, Jingguo; Zhang, Shangyong. Direct extraction of fibre from a ramie bark. J. Eng. Fibers Fabr. 2020, 15, 1–7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Oeko-Tex Standard 100, Product classes specific limit values according to Annex 4. Available online: https://www.hohenstein.us/fileadmin/user_upload/Downloads/Test_Standards/OEKO-TEX/OEKO-TEX_STANDARD_100_Limit_Values_Appendices_4_5_EN.pdf.
- Zimniewska, M.; Kicińska-Jakubowska, A. Vegetable Fibers Sheet. Institute of Natural Fibres & Medicinal Plants. Available online: https://dnfi.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/fact-sheet-plant-fibers.pdf.
- Senthamaraikannan, P.; Kathiresan, M. Characterization of raw and alkali treated new natural cellulosic fiber from Coc- cinia grandis. L. Carbohydrate Polym. 2018, 186, 332–343. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- De Rosa, I.M.; Kenny, J.M.; Puglia, D.; et al. Morphological, thermal and mechanical characterization of okra (Abelmoschus escu- lentus) fibres as potential reinforcement in polymer composites. Compos. Sci. Technol. 2010, 70, 116–122. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bekraoui, N.; El Qoubaa, Z.; Chouiyakh, H.; et al. Banana fiber extraction and surface characterization of hybrid banana re- inforced composite. J. Nat. Fibers 2022, 19, 12982–12995. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mwaikambo, L. Y.; Ansell, M. P. Chemical modification of hemp, sisal, jute and kapok fibres by alkalization. J. Appl. Polym. Sci. 2002, 84, 2222–2234. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rong M Z, Zhang M Q, Liu Y, Yang G C, Z.H. The effect of fibre treatment on the mechanical properties of unidirectional sisal-reinforced epoxy composites. Compos. Sci. Technol. 2001, 61, 1437–1447. [CrossRef]
- Rout, A. K.; Kar, J.; Jesthi, D. K.; Sutar, A. K. Effect of surface treatment on the physical, chemical, and mechanical properties of palm tree leaf stalk fibers. BioRes 2016, 11(2), 4432–4445. Available online: https://bioresources.cnr.ncsu.edu/BioRes_11/BioRes_11_2_4432_Rout_Surface_Leaf_Stalk_Palm_Tree_8664.pdf. [CrossRef]
- Shahinur, S.; Hasan, M.; Ahsan, Q.; Haider, J. Effect of Chemical Treatment on Thermal Properties of Jute Fiber Used in Polymer Composites. J. Compos. Sci. 2020, 4, 132. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Siti Syazwani a, N.; Ervina Efzan a, M. N.; Kok a, C. K.; Nurhidayatullaili, M. J. Analysis on extracted jute cellulose nanofibers by Fourier transform infrared and X-Ray diffraction. J. Build. Eng. 2022, 48, 103744. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ahmed1, Abu Saleh; Islam, Md. Saiful; Hassan, Azman; Mohamad Haafiz, M. K.; Islam, Kh Nurul; Arjmandi, Reza. Impact of Succinic Anhydride on the Properties of Jute Fiber/Polypropylene Biocomposites. Fibers Polym. 2014, 15(2), 307–314. Available online: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12221-014-0307-8. [CrossRef]
- Kalia, S.; Kaith, B. S.; Kaur, I. Cellulose Fibers: Bio- and Nano-Polymer Composites. In Green Chemistry and Technology; Springer : Berlin; Available online: https://link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-3-642-17370-7.
- RAY, D.I.P.A.; SARKAR, B. K. Characterization of Alkali-Treated Jute Fibers for Physical and Mechanical Properties. J. Appl. Polym. Sci. 2001, 80(7), 1013–1020. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shahinur, Sweety; Hasan, Mahbub; Ahsan, Qumrul; Sultana, Nayer; Ahmed, Zakaria; Haider, Julfikar. Effect of Rot-, Fire-, and Water-Retardant Treatments on Jute Fiber and Their Associated Thermoplastic Composites: A Study by FTIR. Polymers 2021, 13(15), 2571. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Huleihel, M.; Salman, A.; Erukhimovich, V.; Ramesh, J.; Hammody, Z.; Mordechai, S. Novel optical method for study of viral carcinogenesis in vitro. J. Biochem. Biophys. Methods 2002, 50, 111–121. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Movasaghi, Zanyar; Rehman, Shazza; Rehman, Ihtesham ur. Fourier Transform Infrared (FTIR) Spectroscopy of Biological Tissues. Appl. Spectrosc. Rev. 2008, 43(2), 134–179. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dayan, A. R.; Habib, M.; Kaysar, M. A.; Uddin, M. Study on the Physico-Mechanical Properties of Okra Fibre at Different Harvesting Time. Saudi J. Eng. Technol. 2020, 5, 304–309. Available online: https://saudijournals.com/media/articles/SJEAT_58_304-309.pdf. [CrossRef]
- Roy, K.; Debnath, S. C.; Tzounis, L.; Pongwisuthiruchte, A.; Potiyaraj, P. Effect of Various Surface Treatments on the Performance of Jute Fibers Filled Natural Rubber (NR) Composites. Polymers 2020, 12, 369. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Abouzaid, Hanaa; Abouzaid, Khalil. Production and investigation of bio-textile films produced from bacterial cellulose biosynthesis from black tea and ginger, and cultivation on sugar cane media. J. Ind. Text. 2024, 54, 1–35. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yamamoto, H.; Horn, F. In Situ crystallization of bacterial cellulose I. Influences of polymeric additives, stirring and temperature on the formation celluloses I α and I β as revealed by cross polarization/magic angle spinning (CP/MAS)13C NMR spectroscopy. Cellulose 1994, 1, 57–66. Available online: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/BF00818798. [CrossRef]
- Revol, J.F.; Dietrich, A.; Goring, D.A.I. Effect of mercerization on the crystallite size and crystallinity index in cellulose from different sources. Can. J. Chem. 1987, 65, 1724–1725. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Oh, Sang Youn; Yoo, Dong Il; Shin, Younsook; Kim, Hwan Chul; Kim, Hak Yong; Chung, Yong Sik; Parkd, Won Ho; Youke, Ji Ho. Crystalline structure analysis of cellulose treated with sodium hydroxide and carbon dioxide by means of X-ray diffraction and FTIR spectroscopy. Carbohydr. Res. 2005, 340, 2376–2391. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- French, A.D. Idealized powder diffraction patterns for cellulose polymorphs. Cellulose 2014, 21(2), 885–896. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Segal, L.; Creely, J.J.; Martin, A.E.; Conrad, C.M. An empirical method for estimating the degree of crystallinity of native cellulose using the X-ray diffractometer. Text. Res. J. 1959, 29(10), 786–794. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kalia, S.; Kaith, B.S.; Kaur, I. Pretreatments of natural fibers and their application as reinforcing material in polymer composites—a review. Polym. Eng. Sci. 2011, 51(8), 1231–1249. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bledzki, A. K.; Gassan, J. Composites reinforced with cellulose based fibres. Prog. Polym. Sci. 1999, 24(2), 221–274. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Satyanarayana, K.G.; Arizaga, G.G.C.; Wypych, F. Biodegradable composites based on lignocellulosic fibers—An overview. Prog. Polym. Sci. 2009, 34(9), 982–1021. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- John, M.J.; Thomas, S. Biofibres and biocomposites. Carbohydr. Polym. 2008, 71(3), 343–364. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Joseph, P.V.; Rabello, M.S.; Mattoso, L.H.C.; et al. Environmental effects on the degradation behaviour of sisal fibre reinforced polypropylene composites. Compos. Sci. Technol. 2002, 62(10–11), 1357–1372. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- RAY, D.I.P.A.; SARKAR, B. K. Characterization of Alkali-Treated Jute Fibers for Physical and Mechanical Properties. J. Appl. Polym. Sci. 2001, 80((7) 16), 1013–1020. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dai, Dasong; Fan, Mizi. Characteristic and Performance of Elementary Hemp Fibre. Mater. Sci. Appl. 2010, 1, 336–342. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wan Nadirah, W. O.; Jawaid, M.; Al Masri, Abeer A; Abdul Khalil, H. P. S.; Suhaily, S. S.; Mohamed, A. R. Cell Wall Morphology, Chemical and Thermal Analysis of Cultivated Pineapple Leaf Fibres for Industrial Applications. J. Polym. Env. 2012, 20, 404–411. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sgriccia, N.; Hawley, M. C.; Misra, M. Characterization of natural fiber surfaces and natural fiber composites. Compos. Part A Appl. Sci. Manuf. 2008, 39(10), 1632–1637. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Paper and Composites from Agro-based Resources. In Carbohydrate Polymers; Rowell, R. M., Young, R. A., Rowell, J. K., Eds.; CRC Press: Boca Raton, 2000; Volume 41, 1, p. 69. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Alvarez, V.A.; Ruscekaite, R.A.; Vazquez, A. Mechanical Properties and Water Absorption Behavior of Composites Made from a Biodegradable Matrix and Alkaline-Treated Sisal Fibers. J. Compos. Mater. 2003, 37(17), 1575. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Frederick, T.W.; Norman, W. Natural fibers plastics and composites. In Kluwer Academic Publishers. Springer; New York, 2004; Available online: https://link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-1-4419-9050-1.
- Reddy, N.; Yang, Y. Biofibers from agricultural byproducts for industrial applications. Trends Biotechnol. 2005, 23(1), 2227. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Sun, R.; et al. Fractional isolation and structural characterization of lignins from oil palm trunk and empty fruit bunch fibers. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2004, 52(9), 2563–2568. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Faruk, O.; Bledzki, A. K.; Fink, H.-P.; Sain, M. Biocomposites reinforced with natural fibers: 2000-2010. Prog. Polym. Sci. 2012, 37(11), 1552–1596. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Siqueira, G.; Bras, J.; Dufresne, A. Cellulosic bionanocomposites: A review of preparation, properties and applications. Polymers 2010, 2(4), 728–765. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Li, Y.; Pickering, K. L.; Farrell, R. L. Analysis of green hemp fibre reinforced composites using bag retting and white rot fungal treatments. Ind. Crop. Prod. 2015, 76, 355–363. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Thyavihalli Girijappa, Y. G.; Mavinkere Rangappa, S.; Parameswaranpillai, J.; Siengchin, S. Natural fibers as sustainable and renewable resource for development of eco-friendly composites: A comprehensive review. Front. Mater. 2019, 6, 226. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Satyanarayana, K. G.; Guimara ̃es, J. L.; Wypych, F. Studies on lignocellulosic fibers of Brazil. Part I: Source, production, morphology, properties and applications. Compos. Part A Appl. Sci. Manuf. 2007, 38, 1694–1709. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Xue Li, Lope G, Tabil, Satyanarayan Panigrahi. Chemical Treatments of Natural Fiber for Use in Natural Fiber-Reinforced Composites: A Review. J. Polym. Environmen 2007, 15, 25–33. Available online: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/S10924-006-0042-3. [CrossRef]
- Composites based on natural fibre fabrics, Woven Fabric Engineering. In InTech; Cristaldi, G., Latteri, A., Recca, G., Cicala, G., Dobnik, Dubrovski Polona, Eds.; 2010; pp. 317–42. Available online: http://www.intechopen.com/books/woven-fabric-engineering/composites-based-on-natural-fibre-fabricsISBN 978-953-307-194-7.
- Lee, C. H.; Khalina, A.; Lee, S. H.; Liu, M. A Comprehensive Review on Bast Fibre Retting Process for Optimal Performance in Fibre-Reinforced Polymer Composites. Adv. Mater. Sci. Eng. 2020, 6074063. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jankauskiene, Zofija; Butkute, Bronislava; Gruzdeviene, Elvyra; Cesevicien, Jurgita; Fernando, Ana Luisa. Chemical composition and physical properties of dew- and water-retted hemp fibers. Ind. Crop. Prod. 2015, 75, 206–211. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bacci, L.; Lonardo, S. D.; Albanese, L.; Mastromei, G.; Perito, B. Effect of different extraction methods on fiber quality of nettle (Urtica dioica L.). Text. Res. J. 2011, 81(8), 827–837. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rowell, R.M.; Han, J.S.; Rowell, J.S. Characterization and factors affecting fiber properties. In Natural polymers and agrofibers composites; Frollini, E., Lea ̃o, A., Mattoso, L.H.C., Eds.; USP/UNESP and Embrapa: Sao Carlos, Brasil, 2000; pp. 115–34. Available online: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/237255433_Characterization_and_Factors_Effecting_Fiber_Properties.
- Sydenstricker, T.H.D.; Monachnacz, S.; Amico, S.C. Pull-out and other evaluations in sasal reinforced polyester composites. Polym. Test. 2003, 22, 375–80. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nam, Sunghyun; Netravali, Anil N. Green composites. Physical properties of ramie fibers for environment – friendly green composites. Fibers Polym. 2006, 7, 372–379. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Faulstich de Paiva, Jane Maria; Frollini, Elisabete. Unmodified and Modified Surface Sisal Fibers as Reinforcement of Phenolic and Lignophenolic Matrices Composites: Thermal Analyses of Fibers and Composites. Macromol. Mater. Eng. A Wiley Polym. J. 2006, 291(4), 293–437. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- MITRA, B. C.; BASAK, R. K.; SARKAR, M. Studies on Jute-Reinforced Composites, Its Limitations, and Some Solutions Through Chemical Modifications of Fibers. J. Appl. Polym. Sci. 1998, 67(6), 1093–1100. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wakchaure, M. R.; Kute, S. Y. Effect of Moisture Content on Physical and Mechanical Properties of Bamboo. Asian J. Civ. Eng. 2012, 13(6), 753–763. Available online: https://www.sid.ir/paper/298947/en#downloadbottom.
- Karthikeyan, M.K.V.; Balaji, A.N.; Vignesh, V. Effect of rope mat and random orientation on mechanical and thermal properties of banana ribbon-reinforced polyester composites and its application. Int. J. Polym. Anal. Charact. 2016, 21(4), 296e304. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- El-Kassas, A. M.; Elsheikh, A. H. A new eco-friendly mechanical technique for production of rice straw fbers for medium density fberboards manufacturing. Int. J. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2021, 18, 979–988. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sethupathi, Murugan; Khumalo, Mandla Vincent; Skosana, Sifiso John; Muniyasamy, Sudhakar. Recent Developments of Pineapple Leaf Fiber (PALF) Utilization in the Polymer Composites—A Review. MDPI J. 2024, 11(8), 245. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mangal, Ravindra; Saxena, N.S.; Sreekala, M.S.; Thomas, S.; Singh, Kedar. Thermal properties of pineapple leaf fiber reinforced composites. Mater. Sci. Eng. A 2003, 339(1-2), 281–285. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mishra, Supriya; Mohanty, Amar K.; Drzal, Lawrence T; Misra, Manjusri; Hinrichsen, Georg. A Review on Pineapple Leaf Fibers, Sisal Fibers and Their Biocomposites. Macromol. Mater. Eng. 2004, 289, 955–974. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Vignesh, V.; Balaji, A. N.; Nagaprasad, N.; Sanjay, Mavinkere Rangappa. Indian mallow fiber reinforced polyester composites: mechanical and thermal properties. J. Mater. Res. Technol. 2021, 11, 274–284. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Filho, P.A.; Bahr, O. Biomass resources for energy in North-Eastern Brazil. Appl. Energy 2004, 77(1), 51–67. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- SachinYadav, Gourav Gupta, Ravi Bhatnagar. A Review on Composition and Properties of Bagasse Fibers. Int. J. Sci. Eng. Res. 2015, 6(5), 2229–5518. Available online: https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Ravi-Kumar-Bhatnagar/publication/367023260_A_Review_on_Composition_and_Properties_of_Bagasse_Fibers/links/63be940756d41566df599e1a/A-Review-on-Composition-and-Properties-of-Bagasse-Fibers.pdf.
- Gurunathan, T.; Mohanty, S.; Nayak, S.K. A review of the recent developments in biocomposites based on natural fibres and their application perspectives. Compos. Part A Appl. Sci. Manuf. 2015, 77, 1–25. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Thygesen, Anders; Oddershede, Jette; Lilholt, Hans; Thomsen, Anne Belinda; Stahl, Kenny. On the determination of crystallinity and cellulose content in plant fibres. Cellulose 2005, 12, 563–576. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kabir, M. M.; Wang, H.; Lau, K. T.; Cardona, F. Chemical treatments on plant-based natural fiber reinforced polymer composites: An overview. Compos. Part B Eng. 2012, 36, 570–576. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- John, M. J.; Thomas, S. Biofibres and biocomposites. Carbohydr. Polym. 2008, 71(3), 343–364. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Li, X.; Tabil, L. G.; Panigrahi, S. Chemical treatments of natural fiber for use in natural fiber-reinforced composites: A review. J. Polym. Environ. 2007, 15(7–8), 25–33. Available online: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10924-006-0042-3. [CrossRef]
- Nishino, T.; Matsuda, I.; Hirao, K. All-cellulose composite. Biomacromolecules 2004, 37(20), 7683–7687. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Siqueira, G.; Bras, J.; Dufresne, A. Cellulosic bionanocomposites: A review of preparation, properties and applications. Polymers 2010, 2(4), 728–765. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shahzad, A. Hemp fiber and its composites – A review. J. Compos. Mater. 2011, 46(8), 973–986. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pickering, K.L.; Aruan Efendy, M.G.; Le, T.M. A review of recent developments in natural fibre compositesand their mechanical performance. Compos. Part A Appl. Sci. Manuf. 2016, 83, 98–112. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Arya, Raj Kumar; et al. Natural Fibers Composites: Origin, Importance, Consumption Pattern, and Challenges. J. Compos. Sci. 2023, 7(12), 506. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chaves, Diego M.; et al. Extraction, characterization and properties evaluation of pineapple leaf fibers from Azores pineapple. Heliyon 2024, 10(4), e26698. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Joshi, Sarang; Patel, Shivdayal. Review on Mechanical and Thermal Properties of Pineapple Leaf Fiber (PALF) Reinforced Composite. J. Nat. Fibers 2022, 19(15), 10157–10178. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Abesho, Kinisa Wareso; Jiru, Moera Gutu; Lemu, Hirpa G.; Alfeki, Mohammed Abdulkedir. Study of mechanical and physical properties of pineapple leaf fiber and coffee husk filler reinforced polymer composite using response surface method. Polym. Test. 2025, 150, 108915. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Thygesen, Anders; et al. Effect of harvest time and field retting duration on the chemical composition, morphology and mechanical properties of hemp fibers. Ind. Crop. Prod. 2015, 69, 29–39. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Akin, D.E. Flax retting and the effect of extended time on fiber properties. J. Nat. Fibers 2010, 7(3), 205–218. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Reddy, N.; Yang, Y. Rapid chemical retting of hemp fibers using sulfuric acid-alkali sequential treatment. ACS Sustain. Chem. Eng. 2019, 7(2), 2400–2407. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Akhtar, N.; et al. Extraction and characterization of natural fibers from plant sources for textile applications. J. Nat. Fibers 2018, 15(4), 545–556. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Thygesen, Anders; et al. A Comprehensive Physical, Chemical and Morphological Characterization of Novel Cellulosic Fiber Extracted from the Stem of Elettaria Cardamomum Plant. J. Nat. Fibers 2019, 18(10), 1460–1471. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Saha, Abir; Kumar, Santosh; Kumar, Avinash. Influence of pineapple leaf particulate on mechanical, thermal and biodegradation characteristics of pineapple leaf fiber reinforced polymer composite. J. Polym. Res. 2021, 28, 66. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- M Zeiner, Reziæ, and I Steffan. Analytical Methods for the Determination of Heavy Metals in the Textile Industry. Kem. Ind. 2007, 56(11), 587–595. Available online: https://hrcak.srce.hr/file/26987.
- Saracoglu, S.; Divrikli, U.; Soylak, M.; Elci, L.; Dogan, M. Determination of trace elements of some textiles by atomic absorption spectrometry. J. Trace Microprobe Tech. 2003, 21(2), 389–396. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Angelova, V.; R Ivanova, b; V Delibaltova, b; Ivanov a., K. Bio-accumulation and distribution of heavy metals in fibre crops (flax, cotton and hemp). Ind. Crop. Prod. 2004, 19(3), 197–205. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tuzen, M.; Onal, A.; Soylak, M. Determination of trace heavy metals in some textile products produced in Turkey. Bull. Chem. Soc. Ethiop. 2008, 22(3), 379–384. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rezic ́, I.; Steffan, I. ICP-OES determination of metals present in textile materials. Microchem. J. 2007, 85(1), 46–51. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sungur, Fana; Gülmez, Fatih. Determination of Metal Contents of Various Fibers Used in Textile Industry by MP-AES. J. Spectrosc. 2015, 640271, 5. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dog ̆an, M.; Soylak, M.; Elc ̧i, L.; Von Bohlen, A. Application of total reflection X-ray fluorescence spectrometry in the textile industry. Mikrochim. Acta 2002, 138(1-2), 77–82. Available online: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s006040200012.
- Brown, M.E. Introduction to Thermal Analysis: Techniques and Applications, 2nd Ed 2001 ed; Springer; Available online: https://link.springer.com/book/10.1007/0-306-48404-8.
- Yang, H.; et al. Characteristics of hemicellulose, cellulose, and lignin pyrolysis. Fuel 2007, 86(12-13), 1781–1788. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Varol, Esin Apaydın; Mutlu, Ülker. TGA-FTIR Analysis of Biomass Samples Based on the Thermal Decomposition Behavior of Hemicellulose, Cellulose, and Lignin. Energies 2023, 16(9), 3674. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Antolin., Gregorio; Oliva, & D. Characterization of sugarcane bagasse by thermal analysis. Inf. Tecnol. 2023, 14(4), 91–96. Available online: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/289576568_Characterization_of_sugar_cane_bagasse_through_thermal_analysis.
- Poletto, M.; et al. Thermal decomposition of wood: Kinetics and degradation mechanisms. Bioresour. Technol. 2012, 126, 7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pickering, K.L.; Efendy, M.G.A.; Le, T.M. A review of recent developments in natural fibre composites and their mechanical performance. Compos. Part A Appl. Sci. Manuf. 2016, 83, 98–112. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mohanty, A.K.; Misra, M.; Drzal, L.T. Natural fibers, biopolymers, and biocomposites. In CRC Press; 2005. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]

















| Heavy metals | Baby wear |
With skin contact |
Without skin contact | Decoration material |
| Arsenic (As) | 0.2 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 |
| Barium (Ba) | 1000 | 1000 | 1000 | 1000 |
| Cadmium (Cd) | 0.1 | 0.1 | 0.1 | 0.1 |
| Cobalt (Co) | 1.0 | 4.0 | 4.0 | 4.0 |
| Cr (Vl) ( Chromium (Vl) / Chrom (Vl)) | 0.5 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 0.5 |
| Chromium (Cr) | 1.0 | 2.0 | 2.0 | 2.0 |
| Copper (Cu) | 25.0 | 50.0 | 50.0 | 50.0 |
| Mercury (Hg) | 0.02 | 0.02 | 0.02 | 0.02 |
| Nickel (Ni) | 1.0 | 4.07 | 4.0 | 4.0 |
| Lead (Pb) | 0.2 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 |
| Antimony (Sb) | 30.0 | 30.0 | 30.0 | |
| Se (Selenium) | 100 | 100 | 100 | 100 |
| Wavenumber cm−1 | Functional group | Assignment | References |
| 3339.69470 | ν(OH) (hydrogen bonded) | broad, strong bond from the cellulose, hemicelluloses, and lignin | [44] |
| 2914.77819 | C–H methyl and methylene groups Stretching vibrations of CH2 & CH3 | Cellulose | [44,45] |
| 1736.93943 | C=O stretching (lipids) ν(C=O) most probably from the lignin and hemicelluloses |
lignin, hemicelluloses | [37,46] |
| 1595.30059 | Ring C-C stretch of phenyl (2) | Lignin | [46] |
| 1423.84305 | δ (C–H) | cellulose, hemicelluloses | [47,48] |
| 1319.47759 | δ CH2 (wagging) at C–6 | Cellulose | [49] |
| 1237.47616 | PO2 asymmetric (phosphate I) δ COH in plane at C–6, O–H phenolic |
Cellulose | [46-49) |
| 1028.74524 | Glycogen absorption due to C-O and C-C stretching and C-O-H deformation motions | Cellulose | [45,49] |
| Fiber Type | Extraction Method | Crystallinity Index (%) | Max XRD Peak Intensity (Counts) | Ref. |
| Molokhia | Biological | 60.0 | ~2200 | |
| Molokhia | Cold Chemical | 70.0 | ~2500 | Present work |
| Molokhia | Manual | 64.0 | ~2700 | |
| Ramie | — | 74.5 | ~5200 | |
| Jute | — | 71.5 | ~5000 | |
| Flax | — | 65.2 | ~4700 | [56,57,58] |
| Hemp | — | 70.0 | ~4800 | |
| Kenaf | — | 59.3 | ~4300 | |
| Sisal | — | 67.0 | — (not reported) |
| Fiber | Cellulose (%) | Hemi cellulose (%) | Lignin (%) | Pectin (wt%) | Ash (%) | Moisture content (%) | Ref. |
| Molokhia Biological Retting Extraction | 68.17 ± 4.04 (n = 5) (b) | 22.00 ± 4.51 (n = 5) (b) | 6.50 ± 2.31 (n = 5) (b) | 0.10 ± 0.06 (n = 5) | 1.98 ± 0.83 (n = 5) | 3.93 ± 0.48 (n = 5) | Present work |
|
Molokhia Chemical Extraction |
72.23 ± 4.04 (n = 5) (a) | 17.00 ± 4.51 (n = 5) (c) | 3.20 ± 2.31 (n = 5) (c) | 0.20 ± 0.06 (n = 5) | 0.50 ± 0.83 (n = 5) | 4.13 ± 0.48 (n = 5) | |
| Molokhia Manual Extraction | 64.16 ± 4.04 (n = 5) (c) | 26.00 ± 4.51 (n = 5) (a) | 7.66 ± 2.31 (n = 5) (a) | 0.10 ± 0.06 (n = 5) | 1.88 ± 0.83 (n = 5) | 3.21 ± 0.48 (n = 5) | |
| Grewia flavescens | 58.46 | N/A | N/A | N/A | N/A | N/A | [12] |
| Ficus benjamina L. Aerial Root | 40.13 | 15.22 | 15.31 | 6.86 | N/A | N/A | [13] |
| Martynia annua stem | 52.56 | 12.34 | 11.56 | N/A | N/A | N/A | [14] |
| Cotton | 90 | 6 | 0 | 0-1 | 0 | 7.5 | [74,75] |
| Flax | 71-75 | 18.6- 20.6 | 2.2 | 2.3 | 2.3 | 10.0 | [76] |
| Hemp | 67- 75 | 16- 18 | 3.0- 5.0 | 0.9 | 1.23 | 10.4 | [77,78] |
| Nettle | 78- 85 | 9- 10 | 2-5 | 0.6 | - | 12.3 | [79] |
| Sisal | 60- 67 | 10- 15 | 8- 12 | 10 | 0.6- 1 | 9-11 | [80,81] |
| Ramie | 80- 85 | 3- 4 | 0.5 | 1.9 | - | 9.9 | [82,83] |
| Jute | 60 | 22.1 | 15.9 | 0.2 | 1.0 | 10.4 | [84,85] |
| Bamboo | 33-45 | 30& | 20- 25 | - | - | 10-16 | [86,87] |
| Banana | 60-65 | 6-8 | 5- 10 | - | 1.2 | 12.3 | [86,88] |
| Rice straw | 51- 70 | - | 12- 16 | - | 15- 20 | 18 | [89,90] |
| Pineapple | 80 | - | 12 | 0 | 11.8 | [91,92,93] | |
| Coir | 43-53 | 14.7 | 38.3- 40.7 | 5.2- 16 | - | 13 | [84,94] |
| Bagasse | 32-44 | 27- 32 | 19- 24 | - | 4.26 | 49 | [88] |
| Property | F-Value | p-Value |
|---|---|---|
| Cellulose (%) | 16.08 | 0.001 |
| Hemicellulose (%) | 15.67 | 0.0011 |
| Lignin (%) | 15.26 | 0.0012 |
| Pectin (wt%) | 5.00 | 0.0397 |
| Ash (%) | 13.54 | 0.0016 |
| Moisture content (%) | 9.86 | 0.0044 |
| Type of fiber | Density (g/cm3) | Elongation at break (%) | Tensile strength (MPa) | Young’s modulus (GPa ) | Diameter (μm) | Ref. |
| Molokhia Biological Retting Extraction | 1.23 ±0.01 (n = 5) |
1.6 ±0.07 (n = 5) | 520.87 ± 9.58 (n = 5) (b) |
29.955 ± 0.39 (n = 5) (b) |
64.80 ±2.05 (n = 5) (b) |
Present work |
|
Molokhia Chemical Extraction |
1.4 5± 0.01. (n = 5) | 1.8 ±0.10 (n = 5) | 600.67± 11.73 (n = 5) (a) |
38.955 ± 0.64 (n = 5) (a) |
13.76±0.44 (n = 5) (a) |
|
| Molokhia Manual Extraction | 1.12 ± 0.01 (n = 5) | 1.7 ±0.07 (n = 5) | 450.89 ±7.34 (n = 5) (c) | 20.955 ±0.34 (n = 5) (c) | 69.99 ±3.59 (n = 5) (b) | |
| Inkberry | 1400 | 2.37 | 146.5 | 24.8 | N/A | [7] |
| Reddish shell bean | 1580 | 1.83 | 111 | 6.11 | 785.87 | [8] |
| Sambucus ebulus L. plant fiber | 1.080 | 7.72 | 50.68 | 6.56 | 0.76 | [9] |
| Beetroot plant | N/A | 7.72 | 50.68 | 52.39 | 284.04 | [10] |
| Alcea rosea L | N/A | 2.47 | 80.96 | 3.28 | 320 | [11] |
| Grewia flavescens | 1.1–1.3 | N/A | 50.3–73.1 | N/A | 507–629 | [12] |
| Ficus benjamina L. Aerial Root | 0.27 | N/A | 77.7 | N/A | N/A | [13] |
| Martynia annua stem | N/A | 1.17 ± 0.02 | 417.5 ± 7.1 | 17.5 ± 1.6 | N/A | [14] |
| Cotton | 1.21 | 3–10 | 287–597 | 5.5–12.6 | 12–22 |
[75,76,101,102,103] |
| Flax | 1.4–1.5 | 1.2–3.2 | 345–1500 | 27.6–80 | 15–20 | |
| Hemp | 1.48 | 1.6 | 550–900 | 70 | 16–50 | |
| Nettle | 1.51 | 1.7 | 650 | 38 | 20–40 | |
| Sisal | 1.33–1.5 | 2–14 | 400–700 | 9–38 | 100–300 | |
| Ramie | 1.5 | 2–3.8 | 220–938 | 44–128 | 25–30 | |
| Jute | 1.3–1.46 | 1.5–1.8 | 393–800 | 10–30 | 20–200 | |
| Bamboo | 0.6–1.1 | 1.3–8 | 140–441 | 11–36 | 10–20 | |
| Banana | 1.35 | 5–6 | 529–914 | 27–32 | 80–250 | |
| Abaca | 1.5 | 2.9 | 430–813 | 33.1–33.6 | 100–250 | |
| Pineapple | 1.5 | 1–3 | 170–1627 | 60–82 | 20–80 | |
| Coir | 1.2 | 15–30 | 175–220 | 4–6 | 100-450 | |
| Kenaf | 1.2 | 2.7–6.9 | 295–930 | 22–60 | 20–40 |
| Property | F-Value | p-Value |
|---|---|---|
| Density (g/cm3) | 2131.890 | 4.441e-16 |
| Elongation at break (%) | 7.617 | 0.007317 |
| Tensile strength (MPa) | 297.430 | 5.978e-11 |
| Young’s modulus (GPa) | 1799.283 | 1.332e-15 |
| Diameter (μm) | 839.382 | 1.278e-13 |
|
Molokhia Biological Retting Extraction |
Molokhia Chemical Extraction | Molokhia Manual Extraction | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Retting time (day) | 15 | 21 | 23 | 3 | 9 | 11 | - |
| weight loss% | 59.70 ±0.35 | 71.40 ±0.41 | 70.50 ±0.46 | 50.72 ±0.33 | 80.70 ±0.53 | 80.53 ±0.30 | 64.60 |
| Method | F-Value | p-Value |
|---|---|---|
| Biological | 1281.08 | 1.0263e-14 |
| Chemical | 13314.54 | 8.3517e-21 |
| Element | Heavy metal contents (mg kg−1) |
|---|---|
| Al | 1.419 ± 0.07 |
| B | nd |
| Ba | 0.1393 ± 0.002 |
| Cd | nd |
| Co | nd |
| Cr | 0.2633 ± 0.01 |
| Cu | 0.0473 ± 0.001 |
| Fe | 5.12 ± 0.30 |
| Mn | 0.0523 ± 0.001 |
| Mo | 0.0838 ± 0.002 |
| Ni | 0.0416 ± 0.001 |
| Pb | 0.1441 ± 0.002 |
| si | 0.7441 ± 0.04 |
| Sr | 11.16 ± 0.73 |
| V | 0.12 ± 0.002 |
| Zn | 0.2659 ± 0.01 |
| p | nd |
| Na | 8.12 ± 0.52 |
| K | 4.11± 0.28 |
| Metals | Cotton | flax | hemp | Polyester | Nylon | Viscose | Ref. |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fe | 0.44–4.49 | — | — | 0.23–28.90 | 3.42–29.90 | 1.99–4.41 |
[115,116] |
| Cu | 0.26–0.78 | 2.1 ± 0.05 | 1.8 ± 0.08 | nd–0.36 | nd –0.48 | 0.26–11.20 | |
| Ni | 0.20–0.70 | — | — | 0.29–3.63 | 0.76–3.63 | 0.30–1.68 | |
| Pb | 0.28–0.30 | 7.2 ± 0.2 | 6.3 ± 0.2 | nd–0.76 | 0.31–3.76 | 0.40–0.80 | |
| Zn | 0.40–5.00 | 25.7 ± 0.4 | 18.9 ± 0.2 | 0.90–4.70 | nd–0.90 | 2.40–3.00 | |
| Cd | — | 3.34 ± 0.05 | 0.40 ± 0.002 | — | — | — | |
| Cr | 0.44–1.12 | — | — | nd–0.42 | nd | 0.22–0.90 |
[117] |
| Cu | 0.28–0.84 | — | — | 0.04–0.34 | 0.04–0.32 | 0.12–13.58 | |
| Ni | 0.24–1.52 | — | — | 0.20–0.24 | 0.24–0.26 | 0.16–0.98 | |
| Pb | 0.18–6.00 | — | — | 0.05–1.08 | 1.08–2.50 | 0.16–0.98 | |
| Zn | 0.42–2.16 | — | — | 0.92–4.04 | 0.14–0.92 | 1.48–3.46 | |
| Co | 0.04–0.96 | — | — | 0.08–0.16 | 0.12–0.16 | 0.01–0.06 | |
| Fe | 3.55–34.3 | — | — | — | — | — |
[118] |
| Cu | 0.76–341 | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Ni | 1.20–4.69 | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Zn | 0.63–4.84 | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Mn | 1.02–2.50 | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Cu | 0.05–0.21 | — | — | 0.05 | — | 0.05–0.06 |
[119] |
| Ni | 0.05–0.10 | — | — | 0.08 | — | 0.09–0.10 | |
| Mn | 0.03–0.05 | — | — | 1.17–2.17 | — | 0.31–0.36 | |
| Al | 0.11–0.17 | — | — | 0.27–0.29 | — | 0.21–0.29 |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2026 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license.