Hostname: page-component-6766d58669-r8qmj Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-05-14T09:17:06.346Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Fermenting knits: A material-driven exploration of knit-based bacterial cellulose biocomposite textile materials through fibre reassembly

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 April 2024

A response to the following question: Bio-calibrated: tools and techniques of biodesign practices

Carolina De Lara*
Affiliation:
Kyoto Institute of Technology, Kyoto, Japan
*
Corresponding author: Carolina De Lara; Email: carolinadelaraa94@gmail.com
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Environmental concerns surrounding textile production have increased the need and interest in developing material innovations and interdisciplinary approaches to offset this ecological impact. Bacterial cellulose is present in several industries, and its biologically produced form has shown potential use within fashion. Within the emerging field of biodesign, research surrounding bacterial cellulose textiles generally focuses on the initial sheeted growth, while alternative outputs and working methods remain scarce. Here, fibre reassembly is analysed by fully integrating broken down BC fibres with knitted structures. Material selection and working methods take a practice-led approach to experiment formulation in order to observe material behaviour as central to development. This project aims to create biocomposite textiles that enhance the properties of bacterial cellulose and expand its designable characteristics through low-tech working methods accessible from designerly backgrounds. The results are intended to inform further research in footwear design contexts, as basis to develop BC-based components. Experimentation shows BC fibres reassembled around the knitted structures, varying according to yarn choice and fermenting environment alteration. This demonstrates potential for material and methodology development while exploring co-design with living organisms. In the context of future applications, BC-based composite textiles can self-assemble at different growth stages, offering the possibility of material-driven approaches to spaces intersecting biology and design.

Information

Type
Results
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BY
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution and reproduction, provided the original article is properly cited.
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2024. Published by Cambridge University Press
Figure 0

Figure 1. Agitated culture of Bacterial Cellulose pellicle grown on Pemotex knit textile sample.

Figure 1

Figure 2. Selection of knit samples before integration with BC exploring (from left to right); A) stitch and gap size using Brother KH965, B) knitted loops as anchors for BC regrowth using Brother KH965 combined with hand-knitting techniques, C) volume knitted using partial knit in Brother KH965.

Figure 2

Figure 3. Comparison of second-hand knit samples after drying the resheeted BC. Row 1: Moisture added; row 2: Moisture unchanged; row 3: Moisture partially removed.

Figure 3

Figure 4. Knitted samples after drying the resheeted BC. Samples 1 and 2 are crocheted in circular stitches and have the most solid attachment. Sample 3 is crocheted in regular double crochet stitch and shows a thorough integration, although not as sturdy as #1 and #2. Samples 4 and 5 used thicker yarns as anchors for the BC to form, but this process flattened the volume of the e-wrapped bulky yarn barely sheeting through the loops. Samples 5 and 6 show successful volume formation, particularly where stitch gaps are larger, as well as harmony in movement when BC and knit are combined.

Figure 4

Figure 5. Table detailing conclusions from sample results.

Figure 5

Figure 6. Visual comparison of granny square knitted with bulky and lightweight yarns, placed under regular daylight (left) and a source of hard light (right).

Figure 6

Figure 7. Visual comparison with previous samples (figure 4.6) knitted in Brother KH965 hand knitting machine using various techniques, and placed against a direct light source. Presence of transparency alters how the textile is perceived, enhancing the pool of designable qualities.

Author comment: Fermenting Knits: A material-driven exploration of knit-based bacterial cellulose biocomposite textile materials through fibre reassembly. — R0/PR1

Comments

No accompanying comment.

Review: Fermenting Knits: A material-driven exploration of knit-based bacterial cellulose biocomposite textile materials through fibre reassembly. — R0/PR2

Comments

This paper discusses the bacterial cellulose formation within a knitted textile. The main contribution of the paper is the exploration of the reassembling capabilities of bacterial cellulose fibres within knitted structures. I recommend that this paper be accepted because, in terms of experimental technique, this paper demonstrates how the material properties change according to different knitting patterns using a low-tech working method. However, it would be valuable to highlight why the footwear section is the main field of interest while providing more case studies to support this choice, as well as some additional recent papers in the field.

Presentation

Overall score 4 out of 5
Is the article written in clear and proper English? (30%)
5 out of 5
Is the data presented in the most useful manner? (40%)
4 out of 5
Does the paper cite relevant and related articles appropriately? (30%)
4 out of 5

Context

Overall score 4 out of 5
Does the title suitably represent the article? (25%)
5 out of 5
Does the abstract correctly embody the content of the article? (25%)
4 out of 5
Does the introduction give appropriate context and indicate the relevance of the results to the question or hypothesis under consideration? (25%)
4 out of 5
Is the objective of the experiment clearly defined? (25%)
4 out of 5

Results

Overall score 4 out of 5
Is sufficient detail provided to allow replication of the study? (50%)
4 out of 5
Are the limitations of the experiment as well as the contributions of the results clearly outlined? (50%)
4 out of 5

Review: Fermenting Knits: A material-driven exploration of knit-based bacterial cellulose biocomposite textile materials through fibre reassembly. — R0/PR3

Comments

This is a clearly communicated paper which novel content and a detailed description about the research process and how to replicate the results, which fits the topic and content of the publication.

I would like to suggest two minor revisions:

1) adding numbers to each of the sections (e.g. 1.0 Introduction, 2.0 method etc) of the paper and taking out informal sub headings that are not directly relevant to the specific findings such as for example "location, location, location" and combining individual paragraphs under longer sub headings such as for example "1.1. Material Properties".

2) Add some more information about the results in terms of being affected by the fibre origin of the knit samples. It would be interesting to know whether the different yarn/ fibre samples in each of the tests - manmade (e.g. acrylic yarn) or natural wool had a different effect on the grown BC outcomes. There is potential to create a short table about the different fibre base material properties in relation to outcomes - in case they were actually different. This could be beneficial for future experiments in terms of circular fashion considerations.

Recommendation: Fermenting Knits: A material-driven exploration of knit-based bacterial cellulose biocomposite textile materials through fibre reassembly. — R0/PR4

Author comment: Fermenting Knits: A material-driven exploration of knit-based bacterial cellulose biocomposite textile materials through fibre reassembly. — R1/PR5

Comments

No accompanying comment.

Review: Fermenting Knits: A material-driven exploration of knit-based bacterial cellulose biocomposite textile materials through fibre reassembly. — R1/PR6

Comments

Thank you for the quick response and additional minor changes - especially figure 5 is very insightful and present your findings in a very useful diagram.

Presentation

Overall score 5 out of 5
Is the article written in clear and proper English? (30%)
5 out of 5
Is the data presented in the most useful manner? (40%)
5 out of 5
Does the paper cite relevant and related articles appropriately? (30%)
5 out of 5

Context

Overall score 4 out of 5
Does the title suitably represent the article? (25%)
5 out of 5
Does the abstract correctly embody the content of the article? (25%)
5 out of 5
Does the introduction give appropriate context and indicate the relevance of the results to the question or hypothesis under consideration? (25%)
4 out of 5
Is the objective of the experiment clearly defined? (25%)
5 out of 5

Decision: Fermenting Knits: A material-driven exploration of knit-based bacterial cellulose biocomposite textile materials through fibre reassembly. — R1/PR7

Comments

No accompanying comment.