International Journal of Polymer Science / 2015 / Article / Tab 3

Research Article

Suitability of Aquatic Plant Fibers for Handmade Papermaking

Table 3

Chemical composition of aquatic and other nonwood plant species.

SpeciesPartChemical composition (%)Types of paper producedReferences

(1) Cyperus  rotundus S42.58 ± 1.32a45.64 ± 1.12a9.54 ± 1.08bCardboard, paper and paperboard Present study
(2) Scirpus grossus S36.21 ± 2.81b49.88 ± 0.71a13.44 ± 3.90aCardboard, paper and paperboardPresent study
(3) Typha angustifolia S44.05 ± 0.49a54.84 ± 4.27a20.04 ± 3.37aCardboard, paper and paperboard Present study
(4) Typha (pati)Wh36.80n/a16.20Cottage industryJahan et al. [35]
(5) Arundo donax In36.70n/a18.50Printing and writing paperVerveris et al. [5]
(6) Musa paradisiaca S59.18n/a18.21Greaseproof paperGoswami et al. [24]
(7) Zea mays Rs47.33n/a21.33Fiber plate, rigid cardboard and cardboard paperKiaei et al. [26]
(8) Bambusa tulda St47.00n/a25.70Printing and writing paperSharma et al. [27]
(9) Brassica napus St34.50n/a20.60Composites, paper and paperboardTofanica et al. [22]

Mean in column with the different superscript (a > b > c) is significantly different (DMRT, < 0.05) for present study. Aquatic plants (no. 1–5); crop plants (no. 6-7), commercial plants (no. 8); vegetable plants (no. 9). n/a: not available; S: stem; Wh: whole; In: internode; Rs: residue; St: stalk.