Bacterial cellulose (Komagataeibacter nanocellulose) BC
(C6H10O5)n, a linear polymer of beta-1,4 linked glucose units
Bacterial cellulose (BC) is a cellulose polymer that Komagataeibacter bacteria form outside their cells as a wet mat.
Evidence level
2 of 5
Lab-measured
- 0Predicted only. No one has made it, or no measurement exists.
- 1Calculated. Only calculated or predicted values from sources.
- 2Lab-measured. Measured properties with their conditions stated.
- 3Space-relevant tests. Measured in conditions relevant to space, such as vacuum or atomic oxygen.
- 4Ground-qualified. Qualified for an application on the ground.
- 5Flown or field-proven. Flight or field results exist.
Water holding
1000 percent
Strength
40 to 76.2 MPa
Stiffness
3.2 to 10.8 GPa
Yield
15.30 g/L
Recipe, share of the weight
- C not statedCarbon
- H not statedHydrogen
- O not statedOxygen
Best for
Water-holding films and audio membranes, where BC is already in use (1000% water retention per Wikipedia)
Weakest at
Strength and stiffness vary widely with culture conditions, and the review says toughness is not sufficient for impact resistance
Risk at a glance
- People None found. No hazard classification found
- If it fails Moderate. Lower tensile strength and Young's modulus in agitated culture
- Corrosion No data. No corrosion data recorded
Quick facts: BC
| Property | Value | Basis |
|---|---|---|
| Tensile strength | 20 to 800 MPa | 8 sourced values across conditions |
| Young's modulus | 0.0015 to 65 GPa | 10 sourced values across conditions |
What is the tensile strength of Bacterial cellulose (BC)?
Bacterial cellulose (BC) has a tensile strength of 20 to 800 MPa. The range covers 8 sourced values across the tempers, forms and test conditions the sources report; room-temperature values are used where a source states a temperature.
What is the Young's modulus of Bacterial cellulose (BC)?
Bacterial cellulose (BC) has a Young's modulus of 0.0015 to 65 GPa. The range covers 10 sourced values across the tempers, forms and test conditions the sources report; room-temperature values are used where a source states a temperature.
What is Bacterial cellulose (BC) used for?
Uses recorded in the sources include Substrate for electronic paper (research); Acoustic or filter membrane in hi-fidelity loudspeakers and headphones.
Why it exists
Bacterial cellulose (BC) is a cellulose polymer that Komagataeibacter bacteria form outside their cells. Wikipedia reports that BC holds water at 1000% against 60% for plant cellulose, and that it has a crystallinity index above 60%. The 2025 review reports crystallinity of 74% to 96%. BC is studied for membranes, wound dressings and audio diaphragms, and it is already used in some of these. Its mechanical values change with the culture medium and agitation, so one value does not describe the material.
Where it's used
Electronic paper (research)
Wikipedia reports active research on microbial cellulose as a substrate for electronic paper, where conductive dopants and electrochromic dyes can be placed in the microfibril structure.
Loudspeaker and headphone membranes
Wikipedia reports that BC has been used as an acoustic or filter membrane in hi-fidelity loudspeakers and headphones marketed by Sony, because of its high sonic velocity and low dynamic loss.
Food
Wikipedia says BC has been the base of nata de pina and nata de coco, and an additive in kombucha diet drinks in Japan.
Wound dressings
Wikipedia names Biofill and XCell as commercial microbial cellulose wound products; XCell is made by Xylos Corporation and mainly treats venous ulcers.
Recipe
(C6H10O5)n, a linear polymer of beta-1,4 linked glucose units
Bacterial cellulose is a linear polymer of glucose units held together by beta-1,4 glycosidic bonds, with the repeat unit (C6H10O5)n (Wikipedia, Cellulose). Komagataeibacter xylinus, the type species of the genus, forms it outside the cell as a gelatinous mat at the surface of the culture (Wikipedia, Bacterial cellulose and Komagataeibacter).
| Ingredient | Share of the weight | What it does |
|---|---|---|
| Carbon C | not stated | Carbon atoms in each glucose unit of the repeat unit. |
| Hydrogen H | not stated | Hydrogen atoms in each glucose unit of the repeat unit. |
| Oxygen O | not stated | Oxygen atoms in each glucose unit of the repeat unit, including the ring oxygen and hydroxyl groups. |
Weight shares are as printed in the sources.
What it can do
Water holding
1000 percent
measured
Wikipedia gives a water retention value of 1000% for bacterial cellulose, against 60% for plant cellulose.
Strength
40 to 76.2 MPa
measured
In Table 3 of the 2025 review, Komagataeibacter strains give tensile strengths from 40 MPa approx. to 76.2 MPa, depending on the culture medium and agitation (ref 40).
Stiffness
3.2 to 10.8 GPa
measured
The same table gives Young's modulus values from 3.2 GPa approx. to 10.8 GPa for these strains and media. The review's introduction gives 10 to 65 GPa, and Wikipedia gives 15 GPa across the sheet plane.
Yield
15.30 g/L
measured
In a Wikipedia table, Acetobacter xylinum BRCS gave 15.30 g/L of BC from glucose with ethanol and oxygen in 50 h, and G. hansenii PJK gave 2.50 g/L in 72 h.
How it compares
BC and plant cellulose share the same repeat unit, but BC forms a purer, more crystalline network: Wikipedia gives a crystallinity index above 60%, and the 2025 review gives 74% to 96%. Wikipedia also gives water retention of 1000% for BC against 60% for plant cellulose. The sources read give no mechanical value for plant cellulose under the same test, so the strength and stiffness of BC cannot be ranked against it here. Within BC, the Table 3 values change with strain, culture medium and agitation.
The same measurements for each material, so you can compare them. Each row names the key condition under the value; the full conditions and methods are in the numbered notes under Technical details.
| Measurement | BC |
|---|---|
| Thermal behavior and safety | |
| Thermal decomposition onset, native freeze-dried bacterial cellulose aerogel | 275 to 330 °C28 |
| Lifetime and stability | |
| Water retention value, bacterial cellulose | 1000 %6 |
| Water retention value, plant cellulose (comparison in the same sentence)Stated in the Wikipedia Macro structure section | 60 % |
| Water holding capacity, Komagataeibacter strain screen (abstract range) | 10.7 to 42.3 g water/g cellulose25 |
| Water holding capacity, wet BC films (Zhong 2020 review) | 60 to 700 times dry weight26 |
| Temperature behavior | |
| Optimal temperature for maximum BC productionStated in the Wikipedia fermentation section | 28 to 30 °C |
| Other measurements | |
| Crystallinity index, range across studies in the review introductionRange printed in the review introduction | 74 to 96 %1 |
| Degree of polymerization, range across studies in the review introduction | 2000 to 6000 -2 |
| Tensile strength, range in the review introduction (refs 2 and 7)Range printed in the review introduction | 20 to 300 MPa |
| Young's modulus, range in the review introduction (ref 14)Range printed in the review introduction | 10 to 65 GPa |
| Tensile strength, second range in the review introduction (ref 14)Range printed in the review introduction | 80 to 800 MPa3 |
| Young's modulus, bacterial cellulose sheet across its plane | 15 GPa4 |
| Crystallinity index, lower bound stated by Wikipedia | > 60 %5 |
| Tensile strength, Komagataeibacter CCUG73629 (K29), standard HS medium | 76.2 MPa7 |
| Tensile strength, Komagataeibacter CCUG73629 (K29), CC medium, intermittent agitation | 57.8 MPa8 |
| Tensile strength, Komagataeibacter CCUG73629 (K29), SCB medium, continuous agitation | 40 MPa9 |
| Young's modulus, Komagataeibacter CCUG73629 (K29), standard HS medium | 7.1 GPa10 |
| Young's modulus, Komagataeibacter CCUG73629 (K29), CC medium, intermittent agitation | 7 GPa11 |
| Young's modulus, Komagataeibacter CCUG73629 (K29), SCB medium, continuous agitation | 3.2 GPa12 |
| Tensile strength, Komagataeibacter CCUG73630 (K30), CC medium, intermittent agitation | 70.9 MPa13 |
| Tensile strength, Komagataeibacter CCUG73630 (K30), standard HS medium | 48 MPa14 |
| Tensile strength, Komagataeibacter CCUG73630 (K30), SCB medium, intermittent agitation | 58.4 MPa15 |
| Young's modulus, Komagataeibacter CCUG73630 (K30), CC medium, intermittent agitation | 10.8 GPa16 |
| Young's modulus, Komagataeibacter CCUG73630 (K30), standard HS medium | 5 GPa17 |
| Young's modulus, Komagataeibacter CCUG73630 (K30), SCB medium, intermittent agitation | 9.9 GPa18 |
| BC yield, Acetobacter xylinum BRCS, glucose with ethanol and oxygen | 15.3 g/L19 |
| BC yield, Acetobacter sp. A9, glucose with ethanol | 15.2 g/L20 |
| BC yield, Gluconacetobacter hansenii PJK, glucose with ethanol | 2.5 g/L21 |
| Optimal pH for BC production, most species | 4 to 6 -22 |
| Young's modulus, wet bacterial cellulose pellicle (Zhong 2020 review) | 1.5 MPa23 |
| Young's modulus, dry bacterial cellulose film (Zhong 2020 review) | 428 MPa24 |
| Crystallinity index, Komagataeibacter strain screen (abstract range) | 64 to 80 %27 |
Why choose it, and why not
Good for
- Water holding: Wikipedia gives 1000% water retention for BC, against 60% for plant cellulose.
- Strength in standard medium: the 2025 review's Table 3 gives 76.2 MPa tensile strength for Komagataeibacter CCUG73629 (K29) in HS medium.
- Audio membranes: Wikipedia reports BC membranes in Sony hi-fi loudspeakers and headphones.
Watch out for
- Strength depends on culture: agitated culture gives lower tensile strength and lower Young's modulus than static culture, per the 2025 review.
- Reported moduli differ by source: the review's introduction gives 10 to 65 GPa, its Table 3 gives 3.2 to 10.8 GPa, and Wikipedia gives 15 GPa across the sheet.
- Cost: Wikipedia says the current price of bacterial cellulose remains too high to make it commercially attractive and viable on a large scale.
- No space flight, radiation, vacuum or hazard data for BC were found in the sources read.
Bacterial cellulose is a high-purity, water-holding biopolymer whose strength depends on how it is grown. The sources read support it for research and for niche food, audio and medical uses. They give no space-flight, radiation or hazard data, so it should not be treated as a flight-qualified structural material.
Technical details
For scientists and researchers. Everything above comes from the record below: every number with its method, its conditions and its source.
Notes
The method, full conditions and any caveat for the numbered rows above.
| # | Measurement | Method | Conditions | Caveat |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Crystallinity index, range across studies in the review introduction | — | basis range compiled across studies cited in the review introduction (refs 2 to 4); test method and culture not stated | Not a canonical property name in spores/property-canon.yaml; snake_case name used. |
| 2 | Degree of polymerization, range across studies in the review introduction | Range printed in the review introduction; recorded as a pure number | basis range compiled across studies cited in the review introduction (refs 3, 5 and 6); the review prints no unit | Not a canonical property name in spores/property-canon.yaml; snake_case name used. |
| 3 | Tensile strength, second range in the review introduction (ref 14) | — | basis range cited in the review introduction (ref 14); conflicts with the 20 to 300 MPa range from refs 2 and 7 in the same introduction | The two tensile ranges in the same introduction do not agree; both are recorded and not reconciled. |
| 4 | Young's modulus, bacterial cellulose sheet across its plane | Stated in the Wikipedia Properties and characterization section | form bacterial cellulose sheetdirection across the plane of the sheetbasis value stated as as high as 15 GPa by Wikipedia; test method not given | Wikipedia value; it falls inside the 10 to 65 GPa range printed in the review introduction and is recorded beside that range, not in place of it. |
| 5 | Crystallinity index, lower bound stated by Wikipedia | Stated in the Wikipedia Properties and characterization section | basis stated as above 60% with no measurement method given | — |
| 6 | Water retention value, bacterial cellulose | Stated in the Wikipedia Macro structure section, citing ref 33 | state wet pelliclebasis value stated by Wikipedia; test method not given | — |
| 7 | Tensile strength, Komagataeibacter CCUG73629 (K29), standard HS medium | Value printed in Table 3 for ref 40 (Akintunde et al. 2022); test method not stated in the review | strain Komagataeibacter sp. CCUG73629 (K29)medium HS (Hestrin-Schramm standard medium)culture static, 30 C, 10 days (Table 2 of the review) | — |
| 8 | Tensile strength, Komagataeibacter CCUG73629 (K29), CC medium, intermittent agitation | Value printed in Table 3 for ref 40 (Akintunde et al. 2022); test method not stated in the review | strain Komagataeibacter sp. CCUG73629 (K29)medium CC (corncob enzymatic hydrolysate with nitrogen and phosphate sources)culture intermittent agitation at 100 r/min for 6 h daily, 30 C, 10 days (Table 2 of the review) | — |
| 9 | Tensile strength, Komagataeibacter CCUG73629 (K29), SCB medium, continuous agitation | Value printed in Table 3 for ref 40 as approx. 40 MPa; test method not stated in the review | strain Komagataeibacter sp. CCUG73629 (K29)medium SCB (sugarcane bagasse enzymatic hydrolysate with nitrogen and phosphate sources)culture continuous agitation at 100 r/min, 30 C, 10 days (Table 2 of the review) | Printed as approx. 40 MPa in the review. |
| 10 | Young's modulus, Komagataeibacter CCUG73629 (K29), standard HS medium | Value printed in Table 3 for ref 40 (Akintunde et al. 2022); test method not stated in the review | strain Komagataeibacter sp. CCUG73629 (K29)medium HS (Hestrin-Schramm standard medium)culture static, 30 C, 10 days (Table 2 of the review) | — |
| 11 | Young's modulus, Komagataeibacter CCUG73629 (K29), CC medium, intermittent agitation | Value printed in Table 3 for ref 40 (Akintunde et al. 2022); test method not stated in the review | strain Komagataeibacter sp. CCUG73629 (K29)medium CC (corncob enzymatic hydrolysate with nitrogen and phosphate sources)culture intermittent agitation at 100 r/min for 6 h daily, 30 C, 10 days (Table 2 of the review) | — |
| 12 | Young's modulus, Komagataeibacter CCUG73629 (K29), SCB medium, continuous agitation | Value printed in Table 3 for ref 40 as approx. 3.2 GPa; test method not stated in the review | strain Komagataeibacter sp. CCUG73629 (K29)medium SCB (sugarcane bagasse enzymatic hydrolysate with nitrogen and phosphate sources)culture continuous agitation at 100 r/min, 30 C, 10 days (Table 2 of the review) | Printed as approx. 3.2 GPa in the review. |
| 13 | Tensile strength, Komagataeibacter CCUG73630 (K30), CC medium, intermittent agitation | Value printed in Table 3 for ref 40 (Akintunde et al. 2022); test method not stated in the review | strain Komagataeibacter sp. CCUG73630 (K30)medium CC (corncob enzymatic hydrolysate with nitrogen and phosphate sources)culture intermittent agitation at 100 r/min for 6 h daily, 30 C, 10 days (Table 2 of the review) | — |
| 14 | Tensile strength, Komagataeibacter CCUG73630 (K30), standard HS medium | Value printed in Table 3 for ref 40 as approx. 48 MPa; test method not stated in the review | strain Komagataeibacter sp. CCUG73630 (K30)medium HS (Hestrin-Schramm standard medium)culture static, 30 C, 10 days (Table 2 of the review) | Printed as approx. 48 MPa in the review. |
| 15 | Tensile strength, Komagataeibacter CCUG73630 (K30), SCB medium, intermittent agitation | Value printed in Table 3 for ref 40 (Akintunde et al. 2022); test method not stated in the review | strain Komagataeibacter sp. CCUG73630 (K30)medium SCB (sugarcane bagasse enzymatic hydrolysate with nitrogen and phosphate sources)culture intermittent agitation at 100 r/min for 6 h daily, 30 C, 10 days (Table 2 of the review) | — |
| 16 | Young's modulus, Komagataeibacter CCUG73630 (K30), CC medium, intermittent agitation | Value printed in Table 3 for ref 40 (Akintunde et al. 2022); test method not stated in the review | strain Komagataeibacter sp. CCUG73630 (K30)medium CC (corncob enzymatic hydrolysate with nitrogen and phosphate sources)culture intermittent agitation at 100 r/min for 6 h daily, 30 C, 10 days (Table 2 of the review) | — |
| 17 | Young's modulus, Komagataeibacter CCUG73630 (K30), standard HS medium | Value printed in Table 3 for ref 40 as approx. 5.0 GPa; test method not stated in the review | strain Komagataeibacter sp. CCUG73630 (K30)medium HS (Hestrin-Schramm standard medium)culture static, 30 C, 10 days (Table 2 of the review) | Printed as approx. 5.0 GPa in the review. |
| 18 | Young's modulus, Komagataeibacter CCUG73630 (K30), SCB medium, intermittent agitation | Value printed in Table 3 for ref 40 (Akintunde et al. 2022); test method not stated in the review | strain Komagataeibacter sp. CCUG73630 (K30)medium SCB (sugarcane bagasse enzymatic hydrolysate with nitrogen and phosphate sources)culture intermittent agitation at 100 r/min for 6 h daily, 30 C, 10 days (Table 2 of the review) | — |
| 19 | BC yield, Acetobacter xylinum BRCS, glucose with ethanol and oxygen | Yield printed in the Wikipedia table of bacterial strains and yields (culture time given in hours) | strain A. xylinum BRCS, as printed in the Wikipedia tablecarbon source glucosesupplement ethanol and oxygenculture time 50 h | — |
| 20 | BC yield, Acetobacter sp. A9, glucose with ethanol | Yield printed in the Wikipedia table of bacterial strains and yields (culture time given in hours) | strain Acetobacter sp. A9, as printed in the Wikipedia tablecarbon source glucosesupplement ethanolculture time 192 h | — |
| 21 | BC yield, Gluconacetobacter hansenii PJK, glucose with ethanol | Yield printed in the Wikipedia table of bacterial strains and yields (culture time given in hours) | strain G. hansenii PJK (KCTC 10505 BP), as printed in the Wikipedia tablecarbon source glucosesupplement ethanolculture time 72 h | — |
| 22 | Optimal pH for BC production, most species | Stated in the Wikipedia fermentation section; recorded as a pure number | basis optimum for most species, as stated by Wikipedia | Not a canonical property name in spores/property-canon.yaml; snake_case name used. |
| 23 | Young's modulus, wet bacterial cellulose pellicle (Zhong 2020 review) | Value printed in the Structure and Properties of BC section of the review | state wet pelliclebasis average printed for wet BC pellicles; the printed standard deviation is 0.3 MPa; test method not stated | Printed as 1.5 ± 0.3 MPa; the spread is not carried in the value field. Elongation of 49.0 % is printed beside it. |
| 24 | Young's modulus, dry bacterial cellulose film (Zhong 2020 review) | Value printed in the Structure and Properties of BC section of the review | state dry filmbasis printed as 428.0 ± 24.1 MPa; test method not stated | Printed as 428.0 ± 24.1 MPa; the spread is not carried in the value field. Deformability of 7.5 % is printed beside it. |
| 25 | Water holding capacity, Komagataeibacter strain screen (abstract range) | Range printed in the abstract; printed as gwater/gcellulose in the paper | basis range across nine clones from K. hansenii, K. nataicola, K. rhaeticus, K. swingsii and K. xylinus, with significant differences among strains (p < 0.01) | — |
| 26 | Water holding capacity, wet BC films (Zhong 2020 review) | Stated in the Structure and Properties of BC section of the review | state wet filmsbasis printed as 60 to 700 times the dry weight; test method not stated | — |
| 27 | Crystallinity index, Komagataeibacter strain screen (abstract range) | Range printed in the abstract as high crystallinity of 64 to 80 percent in all samples | basis range across nine clones screened in the same study; method not stated in the abstract | — |
| 28 | Thermal decomposition onset, native freeze-dried bacterial cellulose aerogel | Stated in Section 3.2.2 of the paper, citing ref 81 | form native BC aerogel, freeze-driedbasis decomposition begins between 275 °C and 330 °C as printed; heating rate and atmosphere not given in the sentence | Not a canonical property name in spores/property-canon.yaml; snake_case name used. Aerogel form, not a pellicle. |
Corrosion and compatibility
What happens when it meets other materials and environments.
| Environment | Concern | What happens |
|---|---|---|
| Drying and purification of the wet pellicle | not rated | Drying and purification change BC's morphology, mechanical properties and thermal stability, and the review gives no loss value.1 |
| Heating of highly crystalline BC | not rated | The review says highly crystalline BC has high thermal stability, with no temperature limit given.2 |
| Biodegradation in the environment | not rated | The review lists biodegradability as a property of BC, with no degradation rate given.3 |
| Water, wet pellicle at room conditions | not rated | Wikipedia gives a water retention value of 1000% for BC, but no ageing data for wet or humid storage.4 |
| # | Environment | Details | Test conditions |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Drying and purification of the wet pellicle | The review states that the method used to purify and dry BC can affect its morphological, physical and mechanical properties. It also states that alkali purification improves mechanical properties and thermal stability (refs 16 and 59). No percentage change is given. | basis statements in the review; no test condition or magnitude printed |
| 2 | Heating of highly crystalline BC | The review states that BC exhibits high thermal stability for high crystallinity. No decomposition temperature or service temperature is printed in the sources read. | basis general statement in the review; no temperature or test method given |
| 3 | Biodegradation in the environment | The review lists biocompatibility, non-toxicity and biodegradability for BC (refs 10 to 13). It gives no degradation rate, test medium or time. | basis general statement in the review; no test condition given |
| 4 | Water, wet pellicle at room conditions | Wikipedia gives a water retention value of 1000% for bacterial cellulose and 60% for plant cellulose. It does not state how humid storage or ageing changes the strength of BC. | basis water retention as stated by Wikipedia; no storage or ageing test given |
Risks and side effects
Hazards to people, what happens when a cell overheats, and how the material is handled and stored.
For people
No safety data sheet or GHS classification for bacterial cellulose was read in this run. The review describes BC as biocompatible and non-toxic, but that is a general statement, not a test result.
- The material
- The 2025 review lists BC's biocompatibility, non-toxicity and biodegradability (refs 10 to 13) without a classification or test method.
- Purity
- The review says BC may absorb unwanted compounds and be coloured, so strict purification is needed before medical, pharmaceutical or cosmetic use.
If the material fails
The sources read describe weakness that comes from culture conditions and purification, not from a single failure test.
- Agitated culture
- Agitated culture gives lower tensile strength and lower Young's modulus than static culture, per the review (Section 2.2).
- Stiffness and fragility
- The review says some BC is stiff and fragile, and its toughness is not sufficient for applications needing impact resistance (Section 4.2).
Handling and storage
- Drying
- Drying can change the morphology, mechanical properties and thermal stability of BC, per the review (Section 2.1).
- Purification
- Alkali purification partly removes amorphous cellulose and improves mechanical properties and thermal stability (refs 16, 29 and 59).
Test details
The original wording and numbers from the sources, for readers who want them.
Failure risks
| Failure | Trigger and consequence |
|---|---|
| Lower tensile strength and Young's modulus in agitated culturemoderate severity | Agitated (stirred or shaken) culture used instead of static cultureThe review states that agitated culture gives lower BC crystallinity, lower tensile strength, higher water-holding capacity and lower Young's modulus than static culture. |
| Low strength, stiffness and fragility from some agro-industrial substratesmoderate severity | Some agricultural or agro-industrial waste substrates used as the culture mediumThe review states that low mechanical strength is obtained for some agrowastes, and that BC stiffness and high fragility make it unsuitable for certain applications. It also states that toughness is not sufficient for applications needing impact resistance. |
Handling and storage
- BC may absorb unwanted compounds and be coloured, so strict purification is needed; the review says this limits use in medicine, pharmaceutics and cosmetics.
Mitigations
- Alkali purification partly removes amorphous cellulose and improves mechanical properties and thermal stability, per the review.
Supply and geography
How common the raw materials are and where they come from.
Glucose and sucrose (carbon source for BC)
Glucose and sucrose are the most commonly used carbon sources for BC production, per Wikipedia. The review describes agricultural and agro-industrial wastes as low-cost culture substrates, including corncob, sugarcane bagasse, molasses and sweet potato residues.
- Recycling
- Not found in any source we hold.
Commercial bacterial cellulose producers and products
Zhong (2020) names these commercial producers and products: Hainan Yeguo Foods Co. Ltd. (production and application development), CPKelco (Cellulon liquid cellulose, AxCel PX dry powder), San-Ei Gen (Sun Artist), Kusano Sakko (Fibnano) and Nanollose Ltd. (BC converted to viscose-rayon fibre). Zhong also says nata de coco is so far the main commercial product of BC. The review prints no production share by country.
- Recycling
- Not found in any source we hold.
Documents
Datasheets, safety data sheets, papers and standards you can open.
Full record
The complete spore, as stored. Free to reuse under CC-BY-4.0. Images keep the licence shown with each one.
Show the full YAML
spore: profile
id: bacterial-cellulose
spore_version: 0.2
family: cellulose
name: Bacterial cellulose (Komagataeibacter nanocellulose)
abbreviation: BC
role: grown biopolymer for membranes, wound dressings and audio diaphragms
category: living
type: bio-grown-building-materials
summary: |
Bacterial cellulose (BC) is a cellulose polymer that Komagataeibacter bacteria form outside their cells as a wet mat. The 2025 review by Rincon et al. reports crystallinity of 74% to 96% and tensile strength of 20 to 300 MPa across studies. Its Table 3 gives 40 to 76.2 MPa tensile strength and 3.2 to 10.8 GPa Young's modulus for specific strain and culture combinations. Wikipedia reports a water retention value of 1000% for BC against 60% for plant cellulose.
best_for: Water-holding films and audio membranes, where BC is already in use (1000% water retention per Wikipedia)
weakest_at: Strength and stiffness vary widely with culture conditions, and the review says toughness is not sufficient for impact resistance
identity:
formula: (C6H10O5)n, a linear polymer of beta-1,4 linked glucose units
organism: Komagataeibacter xylinus, type species of the genus Komagataeibacter
organism_source: wiki-komagataeibacter
organism_where: Lead section, type species sentence
source: wiki-cellulose
where: Structure and properties section, formula sentence; the same formula is printed in the Wikipedia Bacterial cellulose lead
tags:
environments: []
stresses: []
applications:
- electronics-and-chips
properties:
- benchmark: crystallinity_index
label: Crystallinity index, range across studies in the review introduction
value: 74
value_high: 96
bound: range
unit: '%'
scope: material
conditions:
basis: range compiled across studies cited in the review introduction (refs 2 to 4); test method and culture not stated
method: Range printed in the review introduction
status: ground
source: rincon2025
where: Introduction, first page, sentence beginning BC exhibits high crystallinity
note: Not a canonical property name in spores/property-canon.yaml; snake_case name used.
- benchmark: degree_of_polymerization
label: Degree of polymerization, range across studies in the review introduction
value: 2000
value_high: 6000
bound: range
unit: '-'
scope: material
conditions:
basis: range compiled across studies cited in the review introduction (refs 3, 5 and 6); the review prints no unit
method: Range printed in the review introduction; recorded as a pure number
status: ground
source: rincon2025
where: Introduction, first page, sentence on high degree of polymerization
note: Not a canonical property name in spores/property-canon.yaml; snake_case name used.
- benchmark: ultimate_tensile_strength
label: Tensile strength, range in the review introduction (refs 2 and 7)
value: 20
value_high: 300
bound: range
unit: MPa
scope: material
conditions:
basis: range cited in the review introduction (refs 2 and 7); test method, form and culture not stated
reconcile: a second, wider range of 80 to 800 MPa is given in the same introduction and recorded separately
method: Range printed in the review introduction
status: ground
source: rincon2025
where: Introduction, first page, sentence on high mechanical strength
- benchmark: elastic_modulus
label: Young's modulus, range in the review introduction (ref 14)
value: 10
value_high: 65
bound: range
unit: GPa
scope: material
conditions:
basis: range cited in the review introduction (ref 14); test method, form and culture not stated
method: Range printed in the review introduction
status: ground
source: rincon2025
where: Introduction, first page, sentence beginning Young's modulus of 10-65 GPa
- benchmark: ultimate_tensile_strength
label: Tensile strength, second range in the review introduction (ref 14)
value: 80
value_high: 800
bound: range
unit: MPa
scope: material
conditions:
basis: range cited in the review introduction (ref 14); conflicts with the 20 to 300 MPa range from refs 2 and 7 in the same introduction
method: Range printed in the review introduction
status: ground
note: The two tensile ranges in the same introduction do not agree; both are recorded and not reconciled.
source: rincon2025
where: Introduction, first page, sentence beginning Young's modulus of 10-65 GPa
- benchmark: elastic_modulus
label: Young's modulus, bacterial cellulose sheet across its plane
value: 15
unit: GPa
scope: material
conditions:
form: bacterial cellulose sheet
direction: across the plane of the sheet
basis: value stated as as high as 15 GPa by Wikipedia; test method not given
method: Stated in the Wikipedia Properties and characterization section
status: ground
note: Wikipedia value; it falls inside the 10 to 65 GPa range printed in the review introduction and is recorded beside that range, not in place of it.
source: wiki-bc
where: Properties and characterization section, Young's modulus sentence
- benchmark: crystallinity_index
label: Crystallinity index, lower bound stated by Wikipedia
value: 60
bound: lower
unit: '%'
scope: material
conditions:
basis: stated as above 60% with no measurement method given
method: Stated in the Wikipedia Properties and characterization section
status: ground
source: wiki-bc
where: Properties and characterization section, crystallinity index sentence
- benchmark: water_retention_value
label: Water retention value, bacterial cellulose
value: 1000
unit: '%'
scope: material
conditions:
state: wet pellicle
basis: value stated by Wikipedia; test method not given
method: Stated in the Wikipedia Macro structure section, citing ref 33
status: ground
source: wiki-bc
where: Macro structure section, sentence on water retention
- benchmark: water_retention_value
label: Water retention value, plant cellulose (comparison in the same sentence)
value: 60
unit: '%'
scope: material
conditions:
basis: plant cellulose, as compared by Wikipedia in the same sentence as the bacterial value
method: Stated in the Wikipedia Macro structure section
status: ground
source: wiki-bc
where: Macro structure section, same sentence as the bacterial value
- benchmark: ultimate_tensile_strength
label: Tensile strength, Komagataeibacter CCUG73629 (K29), standard HS medium
value: 76.2
unit: MPa
scope: material
conditions:
strain: Komagataeibacter sp. CCUG73629 (K29)
medium: HS (Hestrin-Schramm standard medium)
culture: static, 30 C, 10 days (Table 2 of the review)
method: Value printed in Table 3 for ref 40 (Akintunde et al. 2022); test method not stated in the review
status: ground
source: rincon2025
where: Table 3, K29 row, tensile strength 76.2 MPa (HS); the same HS value is repeated in the K29 SCB block
- benchmark: ultimate_tensile_strength
label: Tensile strength, Komagataeibacter CCUG73629 (K29), CC medium, intermittent agitation
value: 57.8
unit: MPa
scope: material
conditions:
strain: Komagataeibacter sp. CCUG73629 (K29)
medium: CC (corncob enzymatic hydrolysate with nitrogen and phosphate sources)
culture: intermittent agitation at 100 r/min for 6 h daily, 30 C, 10 days (Table 2 of the review)
method: Value printed in Table 3 for ref 40 (Akintunde et al. 2022); test method not stated in the review
status: ground
source: rincon2025
where: Table 3, K29 CC block, tensile strength 57.8 MPa (I agitation-CC)
- benchmark: ultimate_tensile_strength
label: Tensile strength, Komagataeibacter CCUG73629 (K29), SCB medium, continuous agitation
value: 40
unit: MPa
scope: material
conditions:
strain: Komagataeibacter sp. CCUG73629 (K29)
medium: SCB (sugarcane bagasse enzymatic hydrolysate with nitrogen and phosphate sources)
culture: continuous agitation at 100 r/min, 30 C, 10 days (Table 2 of the review)
method: Value printed in Table 3 for ref 40 as approx. 40 MPa; test method not stated in the review
status: ground
note: Printed as approx. 40 MPa in the review.
source: rincon2025
where: Table 3, K29 SCB block, tensile strength 40 MPa approx. (c agitation-SCB)
- benchmark: elastic_modulus
label: Young's modulus, Komagataeibacter CCUG73629 (K29), standard HS medium
value: 7.1
unit: GPa
scope: material
conditions:
strain: Komagataeibacter sp. CCUG73629 (K29)
medium: HS (Hestrin-Schramm standard medium)
culture: static, 30 C, 10 days (Table 2 of the review)
method: Value printed in Table 3 for ref 40 (Akintunde et al. 2022); test method not stated in the review
status: ground
source: rincon2025
where: Table 3, K29 CC block, Young's modulus 7.1 GPa (HS)
- benchmark: elastic_modulus
label: Young's modulus, Komagataeibacter CCUG73629 (K29), CC medium, intermittent agitation
value: 7
unit: GPa
scope: material
conditions:
strain: Komagataeibacter sp. CCUG73629 (K29)
medium: CC (corncob enzymatic hydrolysate with nitrogen and phosphate sources)
culture: intermittent agitation at 100 r/min for 6 h daily, 30 C, 10 days (Table 2 of the review)
method: Value printed in Table 3 for ref 40 (Akintunde et al. 2022); test method not stated in the review
status: ground
source: rincon2025
where: Table 3, K29 CC block, Young's modulus 7.0 GPa (I agitation-CC)
- benchmark: elastic_modulus
label: Young's modulus, Komagataeibacter CCUG73629 (K29), SCB medium, continuous agitation
value: 3.2
unit: GPa
scope: material
conditions:
strain: Komagataeibacter sp. CCUG73629 (K29)
medium: SCB (sugarcane bagasse enzymatic hydrolysate with nitrogen and phosphate sources)
culture: continuous agitation at 100 r/min, 30 C, 10 days (Table 2 of the review)
method: Value printed in Table 3 for ref 40 as approx. 3.2 GPa; test method not stated in the review
status: ground
note: Printed as approx. 3.2 GPa in the review.
source: rincon2025
where: Table 3, K29 SCB block, Young's modulus 3.2 GPa approx. (c agitation-SCB)
- benchmark: ultimate_tensile_strength
label: Tensile strength, Komagataeibacter CCUG73630 (K30), CC medium, intermittent agitation
value: 70.9
unit: MPa
scope: material
conditions:
strain: Komagataeibacter sp. CCUG73630 (K30)
medium: CC (corncob enzymatic hydrolysate with nitrogen and phosphate sources)
culture: intermittent agitation at 100 r/min for 6 h daily, 30 C, 10 days (Table 2 of the review)
method: Value printed in Table 3 for ref 40 (Akintunde et al. 2022); test method not stated in the review
status: ground
source: rincon2025
where: Table 3, K30 CC block, tensile strength 70.9 MPa (I agitation-CC)
- benchmark: ultimate_tensile_strength
label: Tensile strength, Komagataeibacter CCUG73630 (K30), standard HS medium
value: 48
unit: MPa
scope: material
conditions:
strain: Komagataeibacter sp. CCUG73630 (K30)
medium: HS (Hestrin-Schramm standard medium)
culture: static, 30 C, 10 days (Table 2 of the review)
method: Value printed in Table 3 for ref 40 as approx. 48 MPa; test method not stated in the review
status: ground
note: Printed as approx. 48 MPa in the review.
source: rincon2025
where: Table 3, K30 CC block, tensile strength 48 MPa approx. (HS)
- benchmark: ultimate_tensile_strength
label: Tensile strength, Komagataeibacter CCUG73630 (K30), SCB medium, intermittent agitation
value: 58.4
unit: MPa
scope: material
conditions:
strain: Komagataeibacter sp. CCUG73630 (K30)
medium: SCB (sugarcane bagasse enzymatic hydrolysate with nitrogen and phosphate sources)
culture: intermittent agitation at 100 r/min for 6 h daily, 30 C, 10 days (Table 2 of the review)
method: Value printed in Table 3 for ref 40 (Akintunde et al. 2022); test method not stated in the review
status: ground
source: rincon2025
where: Table 3, K30 SCB block, tensile strength 58.4 MPa (I agitation-SCB)
- benchmark: elastic_modulus
label: Young's modulus, Komagataeibacter CCUG73630 (K30), CC medium, intermittent agitation
value: 10.8
unit: GPa
scope: material
conditions:
strain: Komagataeibacter sp. CCUG73630 (K30)
medium: CC (corncob enzymatic hydrolysate with nitrogen and phosphate sources)
culture: intermittent agitation at 100 r/min for 6 h daily, 30 C, 10 days (Table 2 of the review)
method: Value printed in Table 3 for ref 40 (Akintunde et al. 2022); test method not stated in the review
status: ground
source: rincon2025
where: Table 3, K30 CC block, Young's modulus 10.8 GPa (I agitation-CC)
- benchmark: elastic_modulus
label: Young's modulus, Komagataeibacter CCUG73630 (K30), standard HS medium
value: 5
unit: GPa
scope: material
conditions:
strain: Komagataeibacter sp. CCUG73630 (K30)
medium: HS (Hestrin-Schramm standard medium)
culture: static, 30 C, 10 days (Table 2 of the review)
method: Value printed in Table 3 for ref 40 as approx. 5.0 GPa; test method not stated in the review
status: ground
note: Printed as approx. 5.0 GPa in the review.
source: rincon2025
where: Table 3, K30 CC block, Young's modulus 5.0 GPa approx. (HS)
- benchmark: elastic_modulus
label: Young's modulus, Komagataeibacter CCUG73630 (K30), SCB medium, intermittent agitation
value: 9.9
unit: GPa
scope: material
conditions:
strain: Komagataeibacter sp. CCUG73630 (K30)
medium: SCB (sugarcane bagasse enzymatic hydrolysate with nitrogen and phosphate sources)
culture: intermittent agitation at 100 r/min for 6 h daily, 30 C, 10 days (Table 2 of the review)
method: Value printed in Table 3 for ref 40 (Akintunde et al. 2022); test method not stated in the review
status: ground
source: rincon2025
where: Table 3, K30 SCB block, Young's modulus 9.9 GPa (I agitation-SCB)
- benchmark: bacterial_cellulose_yield
label: BC yield, Acetobacter xylinum BRCS, glucose with ethanol and oxygen
value: 15.3
unit: g/L
scope: material
conditions:
strain: A. xylinum BRCS, as printed in the Wikipedia table
carbon_source: glucose
supplement: ethanol and oxygen
culture_time: 50 h
method: Yield printed in the Wikipedia table of bacterial strains and yields (culture time given in hours)
status: ground
source: wiki-bc
where: Fermentation production section, table row A. xylinum BRCS (15.30 g/L, 50 h)
- benchmark: bacterial_cellulose_yield
label: BC yield, Acetobacter sp. A9, glucose with ethanol
value: 15.2
unit: g/L
scope: material
conditions:
strain: Acetobacter sp. A9, as printed in the Wikipedia table
carbon_source: glucose
supplement: ethanol
culture_time: 192 h
method: Yield printed in the Wikipedia table of bacterial strains and yields (culture time given in hours)
status: ground
source: wiki-bc
where: Fermentation production section, table row Acetobacter sp. A9 (15.20 g/L, 192 h)
- benchmark: bacterial_cellulose_yield
label: BC yield, Gluconacetobacter hansenii PJK, glucose with ethanol
value: 2.5
unit: g/L
scope: material
conditions:
strain: G. hansenii PJK (KCTC 10505 BP), as printed in the Wikipedia table
carbon_source: glucose
supplement: ethanol
culture_time: 72 h
method: Yield printed in the Wikipedia table of bacterial strains and yields (culture time given in hours)
status: ground
source: wiki-bc
where: Fermentation production section, table row G. hansenii PJK, glucose with ethanol (2.50 g/L, 72 h)
- benchmark: optimal_production_temperature
label: Optimal temperature for maximum BC production
value: 28
value_high: 30
bound: range
unit: °C
scope: material
conditions:
basis: optimum reported across experimental studies, as stated by Wikipedia
method: Stated in the Wikipedia fermentation section
status: ground
source: wiki-bc
where: Fermentation section, sentence on optimal temperature
- benchmark: optimal_production_ph
label: Optimal pH for BC production, most species
value: 4
value_high: 6
bound: range
unit: '-'
scope: material
conditions:
basis: optimum for most species, as stated by Wikipedia
method: Stated in the Wikipedia fermentation section; recorded as a pure number
status: ground
source: wiki-bc
where: Fermentation section, sentence on optimal pH
note: Not a canonical property name in spores/property-canon.yaml; snake_case name used.
- benchmark: elastic_modulus
label: Young's modulus, wet bacterial cellulose pellicle (Zhong 2020 review)
value: 1.5
unit: MPa
scope: material
conditions:
state: wet pellicle
basis: average printed for wet BC pellicles; the printed standard deviation is 0.3 MPa; test method not stated
method: Value printed in the Structure and Properties of BC section of the review
status: ground
note: Printed as 1.5 ± 0.3 MPa; the spread is not carried in the value field. Elongation of 49.0 % is printed beside it.
source: zhong2020
where: Structure and Properties of BC section, sentence on the Young's modulus of wet BC pellicles
- benchmark: elastic_modulus
label: Young's modulus, dry bacterial cellulose film (Zhong 2020 review)
value: 428
unit: MPa
scope: material
conditions:
state: dry film
basis: printed as 428.0 ± 24.1 MPa; test method not stated
method: Value printed in the Structure and Properties of BC section of the review
status: ground
note: Printed as 428.0 ± 24.1 MPa; the spread is not carried in the value field. Deformability of 7.5 % is printed beside it.
source: zhong2020
where: Structure and Properties of BC section, sentence on the Young's modulus of dry BC films
- benchmark: water_retention_value
label: Water holding capacity, Komagataeibacter strain screen (abstract range)
value: 10.7
value_high: 42.3
bound: range
unit: g water/g cellulose
scope: material
conditions:
basis: range across nine clones from K. hansenii, K. nataicola, K. rhaeticus, K. swingsii and K. xylinus, with significant differences among strains (p < 0.01)
method: Range printed in the abstract; printed as gwater/gcellulose in the paper
status: ground
source: vigentini2019
where: Abstract, sentence on water-holding capacity
- benchmark: water_retention_value
label: Water holding capacity, wet BC films (Zhong 2020 review)
value: 60
value_high: 700
bound: range
unit: times dry weight
scope: material
conditions:
state: wet films
basis: printed as 60 to 700 times the dry weight; test method not stated
method: Stated in the Structure and Properties of BC section of the review
status: ground
source: zhong2020
where: Structure and Properties of BC section, water-holding capacity sentence
- benchmark: crystallinity_index
label: Crystallinity index, Komagataeibacter strain screen (abstract range)
value: 64
value_high: 80
bound: range
unit: '%'
scope: material
conditions:
basis: range across nine clones screened in the same study; method not stated in the abstract
method: Range printed in the abstract as high crystallinity of 64 to 80 percent in all samples
status: ground
source: vigentini2019
where: Abstract, sentence on crystallinity
- benchmark: thermal_decomposition_onset
label: Thermal decomposition onset, native freeze-dried bacterial cellulose aerogel
value: 275
value_high: 330
bound: range
unit: °C
scope: material
conditions:
form: native BC aerogel, freeze-dried
basis: decomposition begins between 275 °C and 330 °C as printed; heating rate and atmosphere not given in the sentence
method: Stated in Section 3.2.2 of the paper, citing ref 81
status: ground
note: Not a canonical property name in spores/property-canon.yaml; snake_case name used. Aerogel form, not a pellicle.
source: gels2024
where: Section 3.2.2 (freeze-drying), sentence on native BC aerogel decomposition
corrosion:
- environment: Drying and purification of the wet pellicle
headline: Drying and purification change BC's morphology, mechanical properties and thermal stability, and the review gives no loss value.
effect: The review states that the method used to purify and dry BC can affect its morphological, physical and mechanical properties. It also states that alkali purification improves mechanical properties and thermal stability (refs 16 and 59). No percentage change is given.
rating: unknown
conditions:
basis: statements in the review; no test condition or magnitude printed
source: rincon2025
where: Section 2.1, purification and drying paragraph
- environment: Heating of highly crystalline BC
headline: The review says highly crystalline BC has high thermal stability, with no temperature limit given.
effect: The review states that BC exhibits high thermal stability for high crystallinity. No decomposition temperature or service temperature is printed in the sources read.
rating: unknown
conditions:
basis: general statement in the review; no temperature or test method given
source: rincon2025
where: Section 1 (Introduction), crystallinity paragraph
- environment: Biodegradation in the environment
headline: The review lists biodegradability as a property of BC, with no degradation rate given.
effect: The review lists biocompatibility, non-toxicity and biodegradability for BC (refs 10 to 13). It gives no degradation rate, test medium or time.
rating: unknown
conditions:
basis: general statement in the review; no test condition given
source: rincon2025
where: Section 1 (Introduction), paragraph on biocompatibility and biodegradability
- environment: Water, wet pellicle at room conditions
headline: Wikipedia gives a water retention value of 1000% for BC, but no ageing data for wet or humid storage.
effect: Wikipedia gives a water retention value of 1000% for bacterial cellulose and 60% for plant cellulose. It does not state how humid storage or ageing changes the strength of BC.
rating: unknown
conditions:
basis: water retention as stated by Wikipedia; no storage or ageing test given
source: wiki-bc
where: Macro structure section, sentence on water retention
risks:
hazards:
- text: The review describes BC as biocompatible, non-toxic and biodegradable, as a general statement with no hazard classification and no test method.
ghs: []
source: rincon2025
where: Section 1 (Introduction), refs 10 to 13
- text: 'No GHS classification for bacterial cellulose was found. The Avantor safety data sheet for cellulose powder (CAS 9004-34-6) gives the signal word Warning and the hazard statement May form combustible dust concentrations in air, with no hazard symbol. It states Other hazards which do not result in GHS classification: None.'
ghs: []
source: avantor-cellulose-sds
where: Section 2 (Hazard(s) identification), Label Elements and Other hazards rows; this SDS is for cellulose powder, not for bacterial cellulose
- text: The same cellulose powder SDS states Dust may form explosive mixture with air in its fire-fighting section, and says to avoid generation and spreading of dust in its handling section.
ghs: []
source: avantor-cellulose-sds
where: Section 5 (Fire-fighting measures), General Fire Hazards row; Section 7 (Handling and storage), precautions for safe handling
failure_risks:
- mode: Lower tensile strength and Young's modulus in agitated culture
trigger: Agitated (stirred or shaken) culture used instead of static culture
consequence: The review states that agitated culture gives lower BC crystallinity, lower tensile strength, higher water-holding capacity and lower Young's modulus than static culture.
severity: moderate
source: rincon2025
where: Section 2.2, first paragraph (refs 14, 47, 57, 3, 59 and 60)
- mode: Low strength, stiffness and fragility from some agro-industrial substrates
trigger: Some agricultural or agro-industrial waste substrates used as the culture medium
consequence: The review states that low mechanical strength is obtained for some agrowastes, and that BC stiffness and high fragility make it unsuitable for certain applications. It also states that toughness is not sufficient for applications needing impact resistance.
severity: moderate
source: rincon2025
where: Section 4.2 (Discussion), list of quality issues 2 to 4
side_effects: []
handling:
- text: BC may absorb unwanted compounds and be coloured, so strict purification is needed; the review says this limits use in medicine, pharmaceutics and cosmetics.
source: rincon2025
where: Section 4.2 (Discussion), quality issue 1 and the paragraph on absorption
mitigations:
- text: Alkali purification partly removes amorphous cellulose and improves mechanical properties and thermal stability, per the review.
source: rincon2025
where: Section 2.1, purification paragraph (refs 29, 16 and 59)
uses:
- application: electronics-and-chips
device: Substrate for electronic paper (research)
example: Wikipedia says microbial cellulose is an area of active research for electronic paper, because its microfibril structure can be impregnated with conductive dopants and electrochromic dyes.
source: wiki-bc
where: Current research and future applications section
- application: electronics-and-chips
device: Acoustic or filter membrane in hi-fidelity loudspeakers and headphones
example: Wikipedia says BC has been used as an acoustic or filter membrane in hi-fidelity loudspeakers and headphones marketed by the Sony Corporation, because of its high sonic velocity and low dynamic loss.
source: wiki-bc
where: Commercial products section
supply:
- subject: Glucose and sucrose (carbon source for BC)
abundance: Glucose and sucrose are the most commonly used carbon sources for BC production, per Wikipedia. The review describes agricultural and agro-industrial wastes as low-cost culture substrates, including corncob, sugarcane bagasse, molasses and sweet potato residues.
producers: []
critical_lists: []
recycling: Not found in any source we hold.
substitutes: []
source: wiki-bc
where: Fermentation section; Table 2 of the review (rincon2025) lists the substrates
- subject: Commercial bacterial cellulose producers and products
abundance: 'Zhong (2020) names these commercial producers and products: Hainan Yeguo Foods Co. Ltd. (production and application development), CPKelco (Cellulon liquid cellulose, AxCel PX dry powder), San-Ei Gen (Sun Artist), Kusano Sakko (Fibnano) and Nanollose Ltd. (BC converted to viscose-rayon fibre). Zhong also says nata de coco is so far the main commercial product of BC. The review prints no production share by country.'
producers: []
critical_lists: []
recycling: Not found in any source we hold.
substitutes: []
source: zhong2020
where: Industrial Production of BC and Textile sections of the review
documents:
- title: 'Review of bacterial cellulose production using agricultural and agroindustrial wastes: Physical and mechanical properties (Int J Agric & Biol Eng 18(5), 2025, open access)'
type: paper
url: https://ijabe.org/index.php/ijabe/article/download/9466/pdf/32886
year: 2025
- title: Effect of Drying Methods on the Thermal and Mechanical Behavior of Bacterial Cellulose Aerogel (Gels 2024, 10(7):474)
type: paper
url: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11276278/
year: 2024
- title: Industrial-Scale Production and Applications of Bacterial Cellulose (Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology, 2020)
type: paper
url: https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/bioengineering-and-biotechnology/articles/10.3389/fbioe.2020.605374/full
year: 2020
- title: Safety Data Sheet, Baker-flex Cellulose, Avantor Performance Materials (version 1.0, revision date 11-18-2014)
type: sds
url: https://www.physics.purdue.edu/primelab/safety/MSDS/SDS/cellulose%20%20-%20Baker.pdf
year: 2014
- title: Set-Up of Bacterial Cellulose Production From the Genus Komagataeibacter and Its Use in a Gluten-Free Bakery Product as a Case Study (Frontiers in Microbiology, 2019)
type: paper
url: https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/microbiology/articles/10.3389/fmicb.2019.01953/text
year: 2019
gaps:
- No manufacturer datasheet, NASA or ESA document, or ASTM or ISO standard for bacterial cellulose was read in this run; all mechanical values come from one review and one encyclopedia.
- The review does not print a test method or specimen condition for the Table 3 values from ref 40; the values are recorded as the review prints them.
- The review states that the crystallinity index depends on the measurement method (refs 62 and 67); no method is given for the crystallinity ranges.
- The review's introduction gives two tensile ranges, 20 to 300 MPa and 80 to 800 MPa; both are recorded and not reconciled.
- Table 3 rows for refs 34 and 58 (G. xylinus and K. saccharivorans) print tensile and Young's modulus values whose labels are unclear in the text layout, so they are left out.
- The review prints no unit for the degree of polymerization; it is recorded as a pure number.
- Density of bacterial cellulose was not found in any source read.
- Melting point, glass transition and decomposition temperature for BC were not found in any source read.
- No UV, humidity-ageing, chemical-resistance, radiation or vacuum data for BC were found.
- No space flight, space-application or ground test of BC was found in any source read.
- 'No GHS classification for bacterial cellulose was found: the PubChem record for CID 16211199 printed no GHS section in this run, and the only SDS read is for cellulose powder, not BC.'
- Country production shares and critical-mineral lists for BC were not found; the company producers in the supply section come from Zhong (2020), and no USGS or EU list was checked for its carbon sources.
- No absolute tensile strength in MPa for BC was found in the Zhong 2020 review, which calls wet tensile strength very high without a number. The tensile values in the 2024 Gels paper are for dried or composite forms and were not recorded.
- Proposed living-category type Microbial biopolymers is not in src/data/taxonomy.ts; the closest existing type, bio-grown-building-materials, is used.
- Water-holding values from the three sources that give them (Wikipedia, Zhong 2020 and Vigentini 2019) use different units and test methods, so they are recorded side by side and not reconciled.
sources:
rincon2025:
title: 'Review of bacterial cellulose production using agricultural and agroindustrial wastes: Physical and mechanical properties'
id: Rincon A, Restrepo GM, Hoyos FE. Int J Agric & Biol Eng 18(5), October 2025
url: https://ijabe.org/index.php/ijabe/article/download/9466/pdf/32886
year: 2025
kind: paper
license: open access (ijabe), linked not reproduced
wiki-bc:
title: Bacterial cellulose, Wikipedia
id: 'Wikipedia article, Bacterial cellulose (sections: Properties and characterization, Macro structure, Fermentation production, Commercial products, Current research and future applications, Challenges/limitations)'
url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bacterial_cellulose
year: 2026
kind: web
license: CC BY-SA 4.0, linked not reproduced
wiki-cellulose:
title: Cellulose, Wikipedia
id: Wikipedia article, Cellulose, Structure and properties section
url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cellulose
year: 2026
kind: web
license: CC BY-SA 4.0, linked not reproduced
wiki-komagataeibacter:
title: Komagataeibacter, Wikipedia
id: Wikipedia article, Komagataeibacter, lead section
url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Komagataeibacter
year: 2026
kind: web
license: CC BY-SA 4.0, linked not reproduced
gels2024:
title: Effect of Drying Methods on the Thermal and Mechanical Behavior of Bacterial Cellulose Aerogel
id: Gels 2024, 10(7):474, published 18 July 2024 (MDPI)
url: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11276278/
year: 2024
kind: paper
license: open access (PMC), linked not reproduced
zhong2020:
title: Industrial-Scale Production and Applications of Bacterial Cellulose
id: Zhong C. Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology, review article, published 22 December 2020
url: https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/bioengineering-and-biotechnology/articles/10.3389/fbioe.2020.605374/full
year: 2020
kind: paper
license: open access (Frontiers), linked not reproduced
avantor-cellulose-sds:
title: Safety Data Sheet, Baker-flex Cellulose (Avantor Performance Materials), SDS_US SDS000001576
id: Version 1.0, revision date 11-18-2014; product Baker-flex Cellulose, CAS 9004-34-6
url: https://www.physics.purdue.edu/primelab/safety/MSDS/SDS/cellulose%20%20-%20Baker.pdf
year: 2014
kind: datasheet
license: linked not reproduced
vigentini2019:
title: Set-Up of Bacterial Cellulose Production From the Genus Komagataeibacter and Its Use in a Gluten-Free Bakery Product as a Case Study
id: Vigentini I, Fabrizio V, Dellaca F, Rossi S, Azario I, Mondin C, Benaglia M, Foschino R. Frontiers in Microbiology 10, 2019 (abstract read)
url: https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/microbiology/articles/10.3389/fmicb.2019.01953/text
year: 2019
kind: paper
license: open access (Frontiers), linked not reproduced
license: CC-BY-4.0
updated: '2026-11-01'
review:
status: draft
method: assistant
checked_values: 32
unreachable: 1
caveats: 3
note: Values read by an AI assistant from the 2025 review PDF, three Wikipedia pages, a 2024 Gels paper (PMC), a 2020 Frontiers review, a 2019 Frontiers Microbiology abstract and an SDS for cellulose powder. Eight sources in total. The PubChem cellulose record printed no GHS section in the deepen run and was not used for hazards.
story:
recipe:
line: Bacterial cellulose is a linear polymer of glucose units held together by beta-1,4 glycosidic bonds, with the repeat unit (C6H10O5)n (Wikipedia, Cellulose). Komagataeibacter xylinus, the type species of the genus, forms it outside the cell as a gelatinous mat at the surface of the culture (Wikipedia, Bacterial cellulose and Komagataeibacter).
parts:
- name: Carbon
symbol: C
role: Carbon atoms in each glucose unit of the repeat unit.
- name: Hydrogen
symbol: H
role: Hydrogen atoms in each glucose unit of the repeat unit.
- name: Oxygen
symbol: O
role: Oxygen atoms in each glucose unit of the repeat unit, including the ring oxygen and hydroxyl groups.
risk_groups:
- title: For people
level: 0
verdict: No hazard classification found
lead: No safety data sheet or GHS classification for bacterial cellulose was read in this run. The review describes BC as biocompatible and non-toxic, but that is a general statement, not a test result.
points:
- label: The material
line: The 2025 review lists BC's biocompatibility, non-toxicity and biodegradability (refs 10 to 13) without a classification or test method.
- label: Purity
line: The review says BC may absorb unwanted compounds and be coloured, so strict purification is needed before medical, pharmaceutical or cosmetic use.
- title: If the material fails
lead: The sources read describe weakness that comes from culture conditions and purification, not from a single failure test.
points:
- label: Agitated culture
line: Agitated culture gives lower tensile strength and lower Young's modulus than static culture, per the review (Section 2.2).
- label: Stiffness and fragility
line: The review says some BC is stiff and fragile, and its toughness is not sufficient for applications needing impact resistance (Section 4.2).
- title: Handling and storage
points:
- label: Drying
line: Drying can change the morphology, mechanical properties and thermal stability of BC, per the review (Section 2.1).
- label: Purification
line: Alkali purification partly removes amorphous cellulose and improves mechanical properties and thermal stability (refs 16, 29 and 59).
why: Bacterial cellulose (BC) is a cellulose polymer that Komagataeibacter bacteria form outside their cells. Wikipedia reports that BC holds water at 1000% against 60% for plant cellulose, and that it has a crystallinity index above 60%. The 2025 review reports crystallinity of 74% to 96%. BC is studied for membranes, wound dressings and audio diaphragms, and it is already used in some of these. Its mechanical values change with the culture medium and agitation, so one value does not describe the material.
uses:
- where: Electronic paper (research)
line: Wikipedia reports active research on microbial cellulose as a substrate for electronic paper, where conductive dopants and electrochromic dyes can be placed in the microfibril structure.
- where: Loudspeaker and headphone membranes
line: Wikipedia reports that BC has been used as an acoustic or filter membrane in hi-fidelity loudspeakers and headphones marketed by Sony, because of its high sonic velocity and low dynamic loss.
- where: Food
line: Wikipedia says BC has been the base of nata de pina and nata de coco, and an additive in kombucha diet drinks in Japan.
- where: Wound dressings
line: Wikipedia names Biofill and XCell as commercial microbial cellulose wound products; XCell is made by Xylos Corporation and mainly treats venous ulcers.
can_do:
- label: Water holding
benchmark: water_retention_value
value: 1000 percent
line: Wikipedia gives a water retention value of 1000% for bacterial cellulose, against 60% for plant cellulose.
- label: Strength
benchmark: ultimate_tensile_strength
value: 40 to 76.2 MPa
line: In Table 3 of the 2025 review, Komagataeibacter strains give tensile strengths from 40 MPa approx. to 76.2 MPa, depending on the culture medium and agitation (ref 40).
- label: Stiffness
benchmark: elastic_modulus
value: 3.2 to 10.8 GPa
line: The same table gives Young's modulus values from 3.2 GPa approx. to 10.8 GPa for these strains and media. The review's introduction gives 10 to 65 GPa, and Wikipedia gives 15 GPa across the sheet plane.
- label: Yield
benchmark: bacterial_cellulose_yield
value: 15.30 g/L
line: In a Wikipedia table, Acetobacter xylinum BRCS gave 15.30 g/L of BC from glucose with ethanol and oxygen in 50 h, and G. hansenii PJK gave 2.50 g/L in 72 h.
compare: 'BC and plant cellulose share the same repeat unit, but BC forms a purer, more crystalline network: Wikipedia gives a crystallinity index above 60%, and the 2025 review gives 74% to 96%. Wikipedia also gives water retention of 1000% for BC against 60% for plant cellulose. The sources read give no mechanical value for plant cellulose under the same test, so the strength and stiffness of BC cannot be ranked against it here. Within BC, the Table 3 values change with strain, culture medium and agitation.'
compare_rows:
- label: Water retention
benchmark: water_retention_value
- label: Tensile strength
benchmark: ultimate_tensile_strength
- label: Young's modulus
benchmark: elastic_modulus
handling:
- Purify the BC before medical, pharmaceutical or cosmetic use, since the review says absorbed compounds and colour limit those uses.
- Record the culture medium, agitation and drying method with each strength value, because the review shows these change the result.
- Treat the 1000% water retention as a Wikipedia figure with no test method given.
good_for:
- 'Water holding: Wikipedia gives 1000% water retention for BC, against 60% for plant cellulose.'
- 'Strength in standard medium: the 2025 review''s Table 3 gives 76.2 MPa tensile strength for Komagataeibacter CCUG73629 (K29) in HS medium.'
- 'Audio membranes: Wikipedia reports BC membranes in Sony hi-fi loudspeakers and headphones.'
watch_out:
- 'Strength depends on culture: agitated culture gives lower tensile strength and lower Young''s modulus than static culture, per the 2025 review.'
- 'Reported moduli differ by source: the review''s introduction gives 10 to 65 GPa, its Table 3 gives 3.2 to 10.8 GPa, and Wikipedia gives 15 GPa across the sheet.'
- 'Cost: Wikipedia says the current price of bacterial cellulose remains too high to make it commercially attractive and viable on a large scale.'
- No space flight, radiation, vacuum or hazard data for BC were found in the sources read.
verdict: Bacterial cellulose is a high-purity, water-holding biopolymer whose strength depends on how it is grown. The sources read support it for research and for niche food, audio and medical uses. They give no space-flight, radiation or hazard data, so it should not be treated as a flight-qualified structural material.
References
Every number above carries a reference number. Click one to see the source and where in it the value comes from.
| # | Source | Type | Year | Used for |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Review of bacterial cellulose production using agricultural and agroindustrial wastes: Physical and mechanical properties | paper | 2025 | 25 values | |
| Bacterial cellulose, Wikipedia | web | 2026 | 13 values | |
| Cellulose, Wikipedia | web | 2026 | 1 value | |
| Komagataeibacter, Wikipedia | web | 2026 | 0 values | |
| Effect of Drying Methods on the Thermal and Mechanical Behavior of Bacterial Cellulose Aerogel | paper | 2024 | 1 value | |
| Industrial-Scale Production and Applications of Bacterial Cellulose | paper | 2020 | 4 values | |
| Safety Data Sheet, Baker-flex Cellulose (Avantor Performance Materials), SDS_US SDS000001576 | datasheet | 2014 | 2 values | |
| Set-Up of Bacterial Cellulose Production From the Genus Komagataeibacter and Its Use in a Gluten-Free Bakery Product as a Case Study | paper | 2019 | 2 values |
Updated