4.7 Review

Advanced oxidation processes for the removal of organophosphorus pesticides in aqueous matrices: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Journal

PROCESS SAFETY AND ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
Volume 134, Issue -, Pages 292-307

Publisher

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.psep.2019.12.004

Keywords

AOPs; Degradation; Meta-analysis; Pesticides; Remediation; Statistics analysis

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The advanced oxidation processes (AOPs), as an alternative technology to eliminate pesticides from aqueous environments, consist of several groups of technologies that have been used with high efficiency in the treatment of water and wastewater in recent decades. A systematic review of the scientific literature to evaluate the most common advanced oxidation processes (AOPs) for the removal of organophosphorus pesticides in aqueous matrices is addressed in this study. Meta-analysis is also performed to provide a precise and robust summary estimate after a systematic and rigorous integration of the available evidence. In the current study, 9 sub-groups of AOPs were reviewed, such as electrochemical, UV/H2O2 photolysis, photocatalysis, Fenton-type, plasma, gamma irradiation, sulfate-based catalyst, sonolysis and ozonation technology for organophosphorus pesticides degradation. The random effects model was used to estimate the pooled measurements and 95 % confidence intervals (95 % CI). In total, six studies were included in this review. All studies, except one, used the photocatalytic process as AOP. The average pooled percentage of AOP for pesticide degradation was 66.8 (95 % CI: 58.1-75.6). In addition, the most studied pesticides are chlorpyrifos and diazinon which, according to the results of the meta-analysis, the photocatalytic process has the highest efficiency of diazinon elimination with an average percentage of 79.2 (95 % CI: 76.8-81.5). (C) 2019 Institution of Chemical Engineers. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available