Skip to main content

Cellulose fibres, nanofibrils and microfibrils: The morphological sequence of MFC components from a plant physiology and fibre technology point of view


During the last decade, major efforts have been made to develop adequate and commercially viable processes for disintegrating cellulose fibres into their structural components. Homogenisation of cellulose fibres has been one of the principal applied procedures. Homogenisation has produced materials which may be inhomogeneous, containing fibres, fibres fragments, fibrillar fines and nanofibrils. The material has been denominated microfibrillated cellulose (MFC). In addition, terms relating to the nano-scale have been given to the MFC material. Several modern and high-tech nano-applications have been envisaged for MFC. However, is MFC a nano-structure? It is concluded that MFC materials may be composed of (1) nanofibrils, (2) fibrillar fines, (3) fibre fragments and (4) fibres. This implies that MFC is not necessarily synonymous with nanofibrils, microfibrils or any other cellulose nano-structure. However, properly produced MFC materials contain nano-structures as a main component, i.e. nanofibrils.



Wood pulp fibres are presently a major area of research for several end-use applications. Fibres can be utilised as reinforcement in bio-degradable composites and as a source of raw materials for bio-energy and biochemical production. Wood pulp fibres have been applied as the raw material for the production of a fibrillated material, which was introduced and defined as microfibrillated cellulose (MFC) by Turbak et al. [1] and Herrick et al. [2]. Several modern and high-tech nano-applications have been envisaged for MFC [1]. Although cellulose fibres have constituted the main source for MFC production, the utilisation of other pulp fibres, agricultural crops and by-products have also been explored [35]. With the years, various subjective definitions have been given to the fibrillated materials, e.g. nanofibrillated cellulose, nanofibres, nanofibrils, microfibrils and nanocellulose [610].

The German philosopher Immanuel Kant (1724 to 1804) wrote: "Things which we see are not by themselves what we see... It remains completely unknown to us what the objects may be by themselves and apart from the receptivity of our senses. We know nothing but our manner of perceiving them...". Perception is thus a key word with respect to how we subjectively interpret structures. This is clearly exemplified in the relatively large number of terms that have been applied to roughly the same material, and emphasises the necessity of objectively clarifying and standardising the terminology applied within cellulose nanotechnology research. All the given terms relate to structures with nano-dimensions. However, is MFC a nano-structure? The purpose of this review is thus to shed more light on (1) the morphology of MFC structures, (2) the relationship between biological components of fibre wall structures and engineered cellulose-based nano-materials and (3) the terms associated with the MFC denomination. This review will not include other forms of cellulose materials, such as whiskers or bacterial cellulose, which may also be referred to as nanocellulose. For interested readers, see Klemm et al. [5].

The structure of wood pulp fibres

The wood pulp fibres have multiscale characteristics [11]. Roughly, typical lengths of fibres are 1 to 3 mm and typical widths are 10 to 50 μm. The fibre wall thickness is roughly between 1 and 5 μm (Figure 1). The fibre wall is composed of defined layers (Figure 1b), including the primary wall (P) and several secondary wall layers (S1, S2 and S3). Each of these layers is characterised by a specific arrangement of fibrils as has been detailed described for more than 40 years ago [12].

Figure 1
figure 1

Structure of wood pulp fibres. (a) Note the network of microfibrils covering the outer wall layer. (b) Microtomed cross section showing the S1, S2 and S3 layers. (c) Cross-sectional fracture area, showing the microfibrils in the S2 layer. Reproduced and modified from Chinga-Carrasco [11].

Chemical pulp fibres are produced through chemical pulping where lignin and hemicellulose are extracted. Chemical pulp fibres have a surface, which is characterised by a particular pattern created by wrinkles and microfibrils in the outer layers of the fibre wall structure (Figure 1a). The surface structure of chemical pulp fibres corresponds mainly to the primary and S1 layers of the fibre wall, which are preserved during chemical pulping. Contrary to the outer layers of the fibre wall (primary and S1 layers), the S2 layer is characterised by having a structure of microfibrils organised in a helical manner [12].

According to Meier [13], the cellulosic components of a wood fibre wall structure are the cellulose molecule, the elementary fibril, the microfibril, the macrofibril and the lamellar membrane. In the work of Maier [13], the term "elementary fibril" was reported to have a diameter of 3.5 nm and was applied following the terminology of Frey-Wyssling [14]. Heyn [12] stated that elementary fibrils are universal structural units of natural cellulose, as the same biological structure had been encountered in cotton, ramie, jute and wood fibres. Blackwell and Kolpak [15] reported also the occurrence of elementary fibrils with diameters of approximately 3.5 nm in cotton and bacterial cellulose, thus giving supportive evidence about the basic fibrillar unit in cellulose microfibrils, see also [16]. According to Meier [13], microfibrils are agglomerates of elementary fibrils and always have diameters which are multiples of 3.5 nm (Figures 1c and 2). The bundling of elementary fibrils into microfibrils is caused by purely physically conditioned coalescence as a mechanism of reducing the free energy of the surfaces [17]. The maximum diameter of a microfibril was proposed to be 35 nm [13]. Clearly, there has been a debate during the 1950 to 1960s about the terminology applied for describing the elementary components of a plant cell wall. Ohad and Danon [18] applied the microfibril term to the basic plant cell wall structures having a diameter of 3.5 nm, i.e. the elementary fibrils [12, 14, 19, 20]. The microfibril structures reported by Frey-Wyssling [14] were defined as "composite fibres" by Ohad and Danon [18].

Figure 2
figure 2

Microfibril of Pinus radiata. Image acquired with TEM. The black arrow indicates the boundaries of a microfibril, which is approximately 28 nm in diameter. The white arrows indicate a single elementary fibril, which is 3.5 nm in diameter. See also Chinga-Carrasco et al. [16].

Elementary fibrils are generated in complex biological processes, involving cellulose synthase complexes in the plasma membrane, exocytosis of cell wall polymers and cortical microtubules [21]. It seems to exist sufficient evidences that elementary fibrils in vascular plant cell walls are composed of 36 β-1,4-glucan chains, synthesised by the cellulose synthase proteins in the plasma membrane (rosette complexes) [22, 23].

Microfibrillated cellulose

Since the introduction of the transmission electron microscope, it seems that researchers have attempted to disintegrate cellulose fibres into single microfibrils/elementary fibrils for ultrastructural studies. Already in the 1950s, ultrasonic, hydrolysis and oxidation treatments were applied for disintegrating cellulose structures [14, 17, 24]. In addition, Ross Colvin and Sowden [25] reported a homogenization process based on beating for opening the structure of cellulose fibres and thus exposing the microfibril structures for transmission electron microscopy (TEM) analysis.

The disintegration of cellulose fibres into their structural components (microfibrils) has also found industrial interest. As mentioned above, in 1983, Turbak et al. [1] introduced a homogenisation procedure for fibrillating cellulose fibres with commercial purposes. The MFC terminology, which was originally applied to the fibrillated material, was probably related to the predominant structures encountered in fibre wall structures, i.e. microfibrils [9].

Although microfibrils seem to be the main component of MFC, several studies have shown that fibrillation produces a material which may be inhomogeneous [2, 16, 26, 27], containing, e.g. fibres, fibre fragments, fines and fibrils (Figures 3, 4 and 5). As exemplified in Figure 3, the fraction of each component depends on (1) the treatment applied to the fibres before homogenization, (2) the number of passes through the homogenizer and (3) the pressure applied during homogenization. The more severe the homogenisation, the more fibrillated is the material. Higher degree of fibrillation can be indicated by an increase in the transparencies of the MFC materials due to the generation of optically inactive fibrils. Such fibrils form dense and compact structures, with low light scattering potential.

Figure 3
figure 3

Films made of cellulose materials with a grammage of 20 g/m 2. (A) Control film made of 100% P. radiata pulp fibres. (B) Film made of MFC, homogenised with three passes and 1,000 bar pressure. (C) Film made of MFC, homogenised with five passes and 1,000 bar pressure. (D) Film made of MFC produced with TEMPO-pre-treated fibres, three passes and 200 bar pressure. (E) Film made of MFC produced with TEMPO-pre-treated fibres, three passes and 600 bar pressure. (D) Film made of MFC produced with TEMPO-pre-treated fibres, five passes and 1,000 bar pressure. Dark threadlike structures indicate poorly fibrillated fibres or fibre fragments. The lighter the local areas, the higher the transparency levels. For details, see Syverud et al. [35].

Figure 4
figure 4

Surfaces of films (20 g/m 2 ) made of microfibrillated cellulose. (A) MFC obtained by mechanical homogenisation. The image corresponds to the film shown in Figure 3C. (B) MFC obtained with TEMPO-mediated oxidation as pre-treatment and mechanical homogenisation. The image corresponds to the film shown in Figure 3F. The insets in (A) and (B) represent the surface structure visualised at 50,000× magnification from areas without a metallic coating. Both MFC materials have been collected after passing five times through the homogeniser, at 1,000 bar. For details, see Chinga-Carrasco et al. [16].

Figure 5
figure 5

Microfibrillated cellulose suspensions dried on glass slides. (A) MFC obtained by mechanical homogenisation. Note the relatively large structures remaining after a homogenisation process. The inset shows structures composed mainly of nanofibrils. (B) MFC obtained with TEMPO-mediated oxidation as pre-treatment and mechanical homogenisation. The inset shows the nanofibrils having relatively homogeneous sizes. Both MFC materials (A and B) have been collected after passing five times through the homogeniser, at 1,000 bar.

Having fibrillated materials with different degree of homogenisation and composed of a variety of structures emphasises the necessity of clarifying the different components encountered in MFC. Table 1 gives a rough classification of MFC components, including classical terminology that has been applied in plant physiology for decades and terminology related to fibre technology.

Table 1 Components of microfibrillated cellulose

The fibril term has been applied for defining structures with a dimension less than 1 μm, although not consequently. Structures with diameters of <1.0 μm have also been observed in the fibre wall structure of pulp fibres. Such structures have been denominated macrofibrils, and diameters of approximately 0.66 μm have been reported [28]. However, according to Meier [13], macrofibrils do not have definite dimensions. A fibril may also be considered an engineered structure as it is produced during mechanical fibrillation. There seems to be no concrete border line between fibrils and fibrillar fines (Figure 5A). Fibrillar fines may also be created through refining or beating, from mechanical and chemical pulp fibres, respectively [29]. Subramanian et al. [30] considered fibrillar fines, microfines and microfibrillar cellulose in the same category, i.e. particles that pass a 75-μm diameter round hole or a 200-mesh screen of a fibre length classifier. Such a definition indicates that MFC may also be considered as fines, as exemplified in Figure 5A. Both materials are composed of relatively small and fibrillated components. However, according to Turbak et al. [1], no amount of conventional beating yields the microfibrillation obtained with an optimally homogenised product.

The microfibrillation mentioned by Turbak et al. [1] does not seem to refer to the creation of micrometre-sized particles but to the fibrillation of fibres into individualised microfibrils with diameters less than 100 nm [1]. In this context, it is appropriate to introduce in this review a scale that has been widely emphasised during the last years within modern technology, i.e. "nano". It seems to be widely accepted that a nano-scale refers to sizes between 0.001 and 0.1 μm (1 to 100 nm). This implies that the nanofibril term refers to fibrils with diameters less than 100 nm. Based on this definition, it seems obvious that microfibrils can be considered nanofibrils, which also are composed of crystalline and amorphous regions. However, the difference between microfibrils and nanofibrils is that the former is a well-defined biological structure found in plant cell walls, whereas the latter can be considered a technological term introduced to describe secondary and engineered structures with diameters less than 100 nm.

As mentioned above, conventional MFC production yields materials with inhomogeneous sizes (Figures 3B,C, 4A and 5A). However, the fibrillation can be facilitated by, e.g. pre-treating the cellulose fibres enzymatically [31] or chemically [32, 33]. Pre-treatments have thus facilitated the production of homogeneous fibril qualities, with fibril diameters less than 100 nm (Figure 3E,F). In addition, some authors have reported a filtration procedure to remove poorly fibrillated fibres, thus maintaining mostly the fraction of homogeneous nanofibrils [34].

In general terms, the production of homogeneous fibril qualities may require major costs, including costs related to pre-treatments and to energy consumption during production. The less energy that is utilised, the less is the fibrillation of cellulose fibres and the less the amount of produced nanofibrils [35]. Considering that conventional fibrillation (e.g. homogenisation without pre-treatment) produces a material that is inhomogeneous and may contain a major fraction of poorly fibrillated fibres and fines, can we state that MFC is a nano-structure? MFC per se is not necessarily a nano-material, but contains nano-structures, i.e. the nanofibrils (Figures 4 and 5). To define MFC as a nano-structure, it is necessary to give substantial evidence with respect to (1) the fraction of fibrillated fibres, (2) the fraction of nanofibrils and (3) the morphology of the nanofibrils in an MFC material. Provided that a given MFC is composed of an appropriate fraction of individualised nanofibrils, the MFC will have a major influence on the rheological, optical, mechanical and barrier properties of the corresponding materials.

Commonly, morphological evidences are given by microscopy and subjective evaluations. Researchers may focus on the visualisation of nano-structures, applying equipment designed for nano-assessment, e.g. FESEM, AFM and TEM. However, such equipment may limit the field of view considerably, which also introduces a subjective pre-selection of small areas containing nano-structures. Proper characterisation requires the quantification of the fibrillated material at several scales. This can include methods for assessing large areas, with a suitable resolution. One important aspect is not only the quantification of nanofibril morphology but also the quantification of fibres that are poorly fibrillated (see, e.g. Figure 3). Methods for assessing relatively large areas and structures at the micrometre scale are thus most valuable for complementing specialised devices for nano-characterisation.


It has been considered most important to propose an appropriate morphological sequence and definitions of MFC components. Microfibrils are important fibre wall components, i.e. biological nano-structures. However, due to the classical suffix "micro", microfibrils may be wrongly associated with micrometre-sized fibrils, which may be 1,000 times larger (>1 μm). According to evidences given in the literature and personal experience with characterisation of a variety of MFC qualities, it appears that MFC materials may be composed of (1) nanofibrils, (2) fibrillar fines, (3) fibre fragments and (4) fibres. This implies that MFC is not necessarily synonymous with microfibrils, nanofibrils or any other cellulose nano-structure. However, properly produced MFC materials contain nano-structures as a main component, i.e. nanofibrils.



microfibrillated cellulose


transmission electron microscopy


field emission scanning electron microscopy


atomic force microscopy.


  1. Turbak AF, Snyder FW, Sandberg KR: Microfibrillated cellulose, a new cellulose product: properties, uses, and commercial potential. J Appl Polym Sci Appl Polym Symp 1983, 37: 815–827.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Herrick FW, Casebier RL, Hamilton JK, Sandberg KR: Microfibrillated Cellulose: Morphology and accessibility. J Appl Polym Sci Appl Polym Symp 1983, 37: 797–813.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Siró I, Plackett D: Microfibrillated cellulose and new nanocomposite materials: a review. Cellulose 2010, 17(3):459–494. 10.1007/s10570-010-9405-y

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Spence KL, Venditti RA, Habibi Y, Rojas OJ, Pawlak JJ: The effect of chemical composition on microfibrillar cellulose films from wood pulps: mechanical processing and physical properties. Bioresource technology 2010, 101(15):5961–5968. 10.1016/j.biortech.2010.02.104

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Klemm D, Kramer F, Moritz S, Lindström T, Ankerfors M, Gray D, Dorris A: Nanocelluloses: A New Family of Nature-Based Materials. Angewandte Chemie Int Ed 50:

  6. Abe K, Iwamoto S, Yano H: Obtaining cellulose nanofibers with a uniform width of 15 nm from wood. Biomacromolecules 2007, 8(10):3276–3278. 10.1021/bm700624p

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Gardner DJ, Oporto GS, Mills R, Samir MASA: Adhesion and surface issues in cellulose and nanocellulose. J Adhesion Sci Techn 2008, 22: 545–567. 10.1163/156856108X295509

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Ahola S, Österberg M, Laine J: Cellulose nanofibrils--adsorption with poly(amideamine) epichlorohydrin studied by QCM-D and application as a paper strength additive. Cellulose 2008, 15(2):303–314. 10.1007/s10570-007-9167-3

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Mörseburg K, Chinga-Carrasco G: Assessing the combined benefits of clay and nanofibrillated cellulose in layered TMP-based sheets. Cellulose 2009, 16(5):795–806. 10.1007/s10570-009-9290-4

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Siqueira G, Bras J, Dufresne A: Cellulose Whiskers versus Microfibrils: Influence of the Nature of the Nanoparticle and its Surface Functionalization on the Thermal and Mechanical Properties of Nanocomposites. Biomacromolecules 2009, 10(2):425–432. 10.1021/bm801193d

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Chinga-Carrasco G: Microscopy and computerised image analysis of cellulose fibres multiscale structures. In Microscopy: Science, Technology, Applications and Education. Microscopy Book Series. Edited by: Méndez-Vilas A, Díaz J. Badajoz: Formatex Research Center, Badajoz, Spain; 2011:2182–2189.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Heyn AN: The elementary fibril and supermolecular structure of cellulose in soft wood fiber. J Ultrastructure research 1969, 26: 52–68. 10.1016/S0022-5320(69)90035-5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Meier H: Chemical and morphological aspects of the fine structure of wood. Pure and applied chemistry 1962, 5: 37–52. 10.1351/pac196205010037

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Frey-Wyssling A: The fine structure of cellulose microfibrils. Science 1954, 119: 80–82. 10.1126/science.119.3081.80

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Blackwell J, Kolpak FJ: The cellulose microfibril as an imperfect array of elementary fibrils. Macromolecules 1975, 8(3):322–326. 10.1021/ma60045a015

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Chinga-Carrasco G, Yu Y, Diserud O: Quantitative electron microscopy of cellulose nanofibril structures from Eucalyptus and Pinus radiata kraft pulp fibres. Microscopy and microanalysis 2011, in press.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Peterlin A, Ingram P: Morphology of Secondary Wall Fibrils in Cotton. Textile Res J 1970, 40(4):345–354. 10.1177/004051757004000407

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Ohad I, Danon D: On the dimensions of cellulose microfibrils. J Cell Biol 1964, 22(1):302–305. 10.1083/jcb.22.1.302

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Moor H: Platin-Kohle-Abdruck-Technik angewandt auf den Feinbau der Milcröhren. J Ultrastructure Res 1959, 2: 393–422. 10.1016/S0022-5320(59)90003-6

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Frey-Wyssling A, Mühlethaler K: Die elementarfibrillen der cellulose. Makromol Chem 1963, 62(1):25–31. 10.1002/macp.1963.020620103

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Lindeboom J, Mulder BM, Vos JW, Ketelaar T, Emons AMC: Cellulose microfibril deposition: coordinated activity at the plant plasma membrane. J Microscopy 2008, 231(2):192–200. 10.1111/j.1365-2818.2008.02035.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Somerville C: Cellulose Synthesis in Higher Plants. Annu Rev Cell Dev Biol 2006, 22: 53–78. 10.1146/annurev.cellbio.22.022206.160206

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Mutwil M, Debolt S, Persson S: Cellulose synthesis: a complex complex. Curr Opin Plant biol 2008, 11(3):252–257. 10.1016/j.pbi.2008.03.007

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Morehead F: Ultrasonic disintegration of cellulose fibres before and after acid hydrolysis. Textile Res J 1950, 20(8):549–553. 10.1177/004051755002000803

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Ross Colvin J, Sowden LC: The three-dimensional morphology of aggregates of native cotton cellulose microfibrils. Int J Biol Macromol 1985, 7(4):214–218. 10.1016/0141-8130(85)90004-2

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Plackett D, Anturi H, Hedenqvist M, Ankerfors M, Gällstedt M, Lindström T, Siró I: Physical properties and morphology of films prepared from microfibrillated cellulose and microfibrillated cellulose in combination with amylopectin. J Applied Pol Sci 2010, 117(6):3601–3609.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Siró I, Plackett D, Hedenqvist M, Ankerfors M, Lindström T: Highly transparent films from carboxymethylated microfibrillated cellulose: The effect of multiple homogenization steps on key properties. J Applied Pol Sci 2011, 119(5):2652–2660. 10.1002/app.32831

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Paiva AT, Sequeira SM, Evtuguin DV, Kholkin AL, Portugal I: Nanoscale structure of cellulosic materials: challenges and opportunities for AFM. In Modern Research and Educational Topics in Microscopy. Edited by: Méndez-Vilas A, Díaz J. Badajoz: Formatex Research Center, Badajoz, Spain; 2007:726–733.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Luukko K, Maloney TC: Swelling of Mechanical Pulp Fines. Cellulose 1999, 6(2):123–136. 10.1023/A:1009256307149

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Subramanian R, Fordsmand H, Paltakari J, Paulopuro H: A new composite fine paper with high filler loading and functional cellulosic microfines. J Pulp Paper Sci 2008, 34(3):146–152.

    Google Scholar 

  31. Pääkkö M, Ankefors M, Kosonen H, Nykänen A, Ahola S, Österberg M, Ruokolainen J, Laine J, Larsson PT, Ikkala O, Lindström T: Enzymatic hydrolysis combined with mechanical shearing and high-pressure homogenization for nanoscale cellulose fibrils and strong gels. Biomacromolecules 2007, 8(6):1934–1941. 10.1021/bm061215p

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Saito T, Nishiyama Y, Putaux JL, Vignon M, Isogai A: Homogeneous Suspensions of Individualized Microfibrils from TEMPO-Catalyzed Oxidation of Native Cellulose. Biomacromolecules 2006, 7(6):1687–1691. 10.1021/bm060154s

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Wågberg L, Decher G, Norgren M, Lindström T, Ankerfors M, Axnas K: The Build-Up of Polyelectrolyte Multilayers of Microfibrillated Cellulose and Cationic Polyelectrolytes. Langmuir 2008, 24(3):784–795. 10.1021/la702481v

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Fukuzumi H, Saito T, Iwata T, Kumamoto Y, Isogai A: Transparent and high gas barrier films of cellulose nanofibers prepared by TEMPO-mediated oxidation. Biomacromolecules 2009, 10(1):162–165. 10.1021/bm801065u

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Syverud K, Chinga-Carrasco G, Toledo J, Toledo P: A comparative study of Eucalyptus and Pinus radiata pulp fibres as raw materials for production of cellulose nanofibrils. Carbohydrate Polymers 2010, 84(3):1033–1038.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references


All the images have been acquired by the author of this review, except Figure 2 which was acquired with the skilful cooperation of Yingda Yu (NTNU). Kristin Syverud (PFI) is acknowledged for valuable discussions and Philip André Reme (PFI) for revising the original manuscript.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations


Corresponding author

Correspondence to Gary Chinga-Carrasco.

Additional information

Competing interests

The author declares that he has no competing interests.

Authors’ original submitted files for images

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 2.0 International License (, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Chinga-Carrasco, G. Cellulose fibres, nanofibrils and microfibrils: The morphological sequence of MFC components from a plant physiology and fibre technology point of view. Nanoscale Res Lett 6, 417 (2011).

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI:


  • Fibril
  • Bacterial Cellulose
  • Cellulose Fibre
  • Plant Cell Wall
  • Pulp Fibre