Biodegradation is a process in which any organic compound is broken down into smaller fragments or molecules by microorganisms. Based on the material’s structure and composition, its biodegradation in the environment can last from days to a few centuries. For example, biodegradable polymers are usually decomposed within six months or a year, whereas the biodegradation process of materials such as synthetic plastic can last much longer. However, the microbes present in the environment have various abilities to metabolize different materials, due to various enzymes they produce, which also affect the time of the biodegradation process [
74]. The biodegradation process can occur in environmental conditions with or without the presence of oxygen, which is why aerobic and anaerobic biodegradation processes can be differentiated, respectively. In aerobic processes, the final products of the microbes’ metabolism are primarily carbon dioxide, CO
2, and water. On the other hand, without any oxygen involved in the process, organic materials are converted into carbon dioxide, water, and methane, CH
4. Other parameters that affect the degradation process of the materials in the environment are temperature, ultraviolet radiation, moisture, etc. [
75]. When talking about polymers, the biodegradation process occurs in four characteristic steps. The crucial step is microorganisms’ attachment and their colonization on the surface. This is the step that initiates the biodegradation process and is followed by biofilm formation due to microorganisms reproducing and growing. Within the biofilm, the enzymes produced by microorganisms break down the polymer into smaller fragments and simpler compounds. This usually occurs due to the presence of the enzyme depolymerase. Furthermore, the polymer chain fractioning into smaller molecules leads to mineralization, i.e., production of CO
2, water, and/or CH
4 through the aerobic or anaerobic process [
74]. PHBV, which is used in this research, belongs to the biodegradable polymers group. Since it is produced by microorganisms as a reserve energy source by consuming substrates with excess carbon and a lack of nitrogen and other elements, it is easily consumed back by the microbes, which makes it biodegradable. Even if found accumulated outside of their cells, microbes can use it as a carbon source, whilst it is worth mentioning that PHBV’s biodegradability in this manner highly depends on the valerate portion in its structure [
76]. Research on this phenomenon was conducted by Mergaert et al. (1992) [
77], and the results confirmed an increase in biodegradability with an increase in the valerate portion to 10% and 20%. However, the degradation rate was highly dependent on the temperature used in the experiment, as well as the microorganisms used for the experiment [
77]. The possible reason for the increase lies in the decrease in crystallinity, which allows the enzymes and water to break down the amorphous parts of the polymers [
78]. Except for the already mentioned depolymerase enzyme, there are other enzymes, such as hydrolases, lipases, peroxidases, and cutinases, which can also be used by microbes to break down PHBV. The specific type of enzyme and its activity can be influenced by the microbial species, the physical properties of PHBV, and some other environmental conditions [
74]. In that matter, it takes several weeks or months for it to fully decompose in nature. Titanium dioxide, TiO
2, which is also used in this research to create nanocomposites with PHBV, is not considered biodegradable because of its inorganic nature. However, it is biocompatible, and it can change and enhance some of the polymer’s properties, which makes the polymer usable in different aspects of life [
79]. In that matter, the biodegradable properties of pure PHBV and PHBV/TiO
2 nanocomposites are assessed in this research.
Figure 13 represents the biodegradation process results of pure PHBV and its nanocomposites in soil. In this assessment, the change in mass of the samples was tracked through 7, 14, 21, 42, and 56 days. Based on the results, the mass difference of the pure PHBV was slowly increased during the period of 56 days, with a maximum mass change of 21.21%. The sample was not fully degraded, which corresponds to the literature [
79], which states that it takes several months for PHBV to fully degrade by microbial metabolism. Reay et al. [
75] conducted a similar experiment in which PHBV microplastics were biodegraded in soil. After 8 weeks, i.e., 56 days, only 1.5 to 5% of the samples were biodegraded. This is due to nitrogen limitation in the substrate (PHBV), which is crucial to initiate microbial growth. Since PHBV does not contain any nitrogen in its molecular structure, microorganisms present in the soil could not grow and enhance their number in the present environment and consume the PHBV. However, the microorganism genera present in the soil also play a significant role in the biodegradation rate, and they were not mentioned in the literature [
75]. The decreased biodegradation rate in this research could also be explained by the nitrogen limitation. All of the nanocomposites tested showed a higher rate of mass loss; however, the results were highly varied. The highest mass difference on the 56th day was observed for the 7_nTiO
2_PHBV nanocomposite. This nanocomposite was fully biodegraded after 56 days, while other nanocomposites showed lower mass differences after 56 days, in comparison with their mass difference obtained after 42 days. The reason for the full biodegradation of the 7_nTiO
2_PHBV nanocomposite lies in its structure, which benefits the biodegradation. As mentioned before, due to the larger nanoparticle content, the PHBV matrix structure becomes more disrupted, with unsystematically formed crystals, and more continuous and exposed amorphous regions [
41]. This was explained by the lowered melting temperature obtained from DSC analysis (
Table 3). This means that this nanocomposite had a more amorphous structure, which is more beneficial for microbes to consume and degrade the polymer [
80]. Thus, the higher mass loss was observed. On the other hand, nanocomposites 1_nTiO
2_PHBV, 3_nTiO
2_PHBV, and 5_nTiO
2_PHBV showed higher rates of mass loss up to the 42nd day of the biodegradation process; however, the mass difference was lowered on the 56th day for all three of the nanocomposites. Since all of the amorphous regions of the PHBV matrix were consumed by the microorganisms, the TiO
2 nanoparticles and the crystalline regions of the PHBV matrix emerged on the surface of the nanocomposites. Since both nanoparticles and crystalline regions are susceptible to biodegradation, they started to adsorb water molecules present in the soil, thus enhancing the mass of the remaining sample and lowering the final mass difference [
80]. Moreover, the results of WVP present in
Figure 10 confirm that these nanocomposites have lower barrier properties towards water vapor, which means that water molecules can penetrate into the nanocomposites’ structure more easily. Similar results were obtained in research by Zare et al. (2019) [
46] by testing PHBV–chitosan nanocomposites with integrated ZnO and Ag nanoparticles. The enhancement in mass of the samples was observed after 8 weeks of biodegradation, which was attributed to the water adsorption on the nanocomposite’s surface [
46]. Similarly, Braga et al. (2018) [
32] conducted biodegradation testing of PHBV/TiO
2 nanocomposites with 1, 2.5, and 5 wt.% nanoparticles for 20 days. The biodegradation process generally resulted in a weight loss exceeding 60%; the highest weight loss (~82%) was observed for the nanocomposite containing 2 wt.% TiO
2. However, previous studies have concluded that TiO
2 nanoparticles tend to reduce the rate of biodegradation compared to pure PHBV, which contrasts with the findings of the present study [
32].
Figure 14 and
Figure 15 present microphotographs of PHBV and its nanocomposites, captured using optical and polarizing microscopy, respectively. Both figures illustrate the surface macrostructure of the samples after 7, 14, 21, 42, and 56 days of biodegradation. A progressive degradation of the sample surfaces is evident over time, including the formation of holes attributed to microbial activity. Notably, microphotographs for day 56 are absent in
Figure 14e and
Figure 15e, as the corresponding sample was fully degraded, as previously discussed and shown in
Figure 13. In most of the micrographs in
Figure 14, numerous black and white spots are visible, which correspond to bacterial colonies. Their presence confirms microbial colonization and indicates that biodegradation indeed occurred. In
Figure 14a, representing pure PHBV on day 56, dark linear structures can be seen, which are identified as fungal hyphae. This suggests that moulds also contributed to the biodegradation process, consistent with their ability to grow on the polymer surface [
81]. Compared to the PHBV/TiO
2 nanocomposites shown in
Figure 14b–e, the surface of the pure PHBV sample exhibited more extensive microbial colonization and was more consistently covered with microbial biofilms throughout the experiment. In contrast, the surfaces of the nanocomposites appeared smoother and showed fewer dark spots, indicating a lower rate of microbial colonization. However, by days 42 and 56, the nanocomposites displayed a greater number of holes relative to pure PHBV, suggesting more pronounced degradation. These observations are consistent with the measured mass loss, particularly for the 7_nTiO
2_PHBV sample, which exhibited complete degradation (100% mass loss). The polarizing micrographs (
Figure 15) provide additional insight into the morphological changes in the samples, highlighting structural disruption caused by microbial activity. Residual brown and yellow regions visible on the surfaces represent adherent soil particles and biofilms that could not be completely removed. The quantity of these residues appears to increase over time, likely influenced by surface roughness. While the amount of residue on nanocomposites is comparable to that on pure PHBV, the nanocomposite samples exhibited more pronounced surface perforation after 42 and 56 days of exposure.
FTIR analysis of all of the samples was conducted in order to track their biodegradation.
Figure 16 represents FTIR spectra of the samples of pure PHBV and 1_nTiO
2_PHBV, 3_nTiO
2_PHBV, 5_nTiO
2_PHBV, and 7_nTiO
2_PHBV during the biodegradation process, respectively. All of the spectra show the peaks of O–H bond stretching, C–H bond stretching and bending, as well as C=O and C–O bond stretching. Wavenumbers at which these peaks occur are shown in
Table 5.
Figure 16a shows FTIR spectra of the pure PHBV sample throughout the biodegradation process. As stated before, all of the spectra show the characteristic peaks of the PHBV structure. In comparison with the initial FTIR spectrum, as the days of the biodegradation process pass, a slight shift of the carbonyl bond stretching peak towards higher wavenumber values can be observed, which corresponds to the microbial hydrolysis of the esteric bond [
82]. This occurrence indicates that the biodegradation process really happened. Spectra obtained for 1_nTiO
2_PHBV (
Figure 16b) show a slightly broader shift of the same bond peak towards higher wavenumber values, as the time of the experiment passes. This means that biodegradation occurred as well; however, the 1_nTiO
2_PHBV were slightly more degraded than the pure PHBV. On the same spectrum, a broader and sharper peak for O–H bond stretching emerges on the 42nd and 56th days. This corresponds to the previously given conclusions for the lower mass difference at the end of the biodegradation process, which state that the adsorption of the water molecules occurred. As stated before, water was adsorbed on the samples by the end of the biodegradation process, and that can be confirmed with FTIR spectra as the O–H bond stretching peak becomes more and more pronounced as time passes. Thus, the O–H bond stretching peaks can be seen on the FTIR spectra. Similar results were obtained for the nanocomposites 3_nTiO
2_PHBV and 5_nTiO
2_PHBV, where the shift of the carbonyl bond stretching peak happened after the determined time periods. Also, on both of the spectra in
Figure 16c,d, O–H bond stretching peaks can be observed, which are getting sharper and broader with time due to the adsorption of water. The FTIR spectrum of 7_nTiO
2_PHBV in
Figure 16e shows the biggest shift in the carbonyl bond stretching peak in comparison with the initial peak. This confirms the highest percentage of mass loss, i.e., the highest biodegradation occurrence among all the samples tested. It can also be seen on the spectrum that the O–H bond stretching peaks do not exist on any of the spectra obtained after the specific periods of the experiment, which means that water did not adsorb on the polymer surface. This also corresponds to the fact that the mass loss is higher and higher as time passes, as visible in
Figure 16.