Skip to main content
. 2021 Apr 29;6(12):4255–4285. doi: 10.1016/j.bioactmat.2021.04.028

Table 5.

Biomaterials from marine organisms applied in 3D bioprinting.

Biomaterials Marine Sources Tested cell types Cell density and viability Advantages(A) and disadvantages (DA) Application 3D bioprinting method Refs
Alginate Brown algae Mesenchymal stem cells 85.0 ± 5.9% A: Spatially varying mechanical microenvironment extrusion printing Bone tissue engineering Extrusion printing [340]
Alginate Brown algae Human mesenchymal stem cells 84% ± 0.7% A: Excellent scaffold fidelity and mechanical properties (higher alginate concentration);
Excellent cell viability and cell spreading morphology (lower alginate concentration)
Bone tissue engineering Extrusion printing [332]
Silk-like protein (aneroin) Sea anemone Mouse pre-osteoblasts, rat myoblasts, mouse fibroblasts, and rat-derived mesenchymal stem cells 99% A: Accurate printability, structural integrity, and biocompatibility Cartilage or skeletal tissue regeneration Extrusion printing [341]
Gelatin Cold water fish NIH3T3 cells Over 80% A: Inexpensive, high emulsion stability
DA: low viscosity and rapid polymerization
Drug delivery Extrusion printing [342,343]
κ-carrageenan-gelatin hydrogel Carrageen C2C12 cells Over 90% A: Excellent structural stability and cell viability. Biological binder for tissue scaffolds Extrusion printing [344]
Chitosan Crab shell Mouse pre-osteoblast cells Over 90% A: Good viscoelastic properties, stable under physiological conditions, proper viscosity values. Bone tissue engineering Extrusion printing [345]
Carrageenan Red algae Mesenchymal stem cells Dead cells were negligible A: Excellent structural strength, cyto-compatible and non-toxic. Tissue engineering and regeneration Extrusion printing [346]