4.8 Article

Adsorption of Bacillus subtilis on single-walled carbon nanotube aggregates, activated carbon and NanoCeram (TM)

期刊

WATER RESEARCH
卷 43, 期 1, 页码 148-156

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.watres.2008.09.023

关键词

Single-walled carbon nanotubes; Bacillus subtilis; Adsorption equilibrium; Adsorption kinetics; Biosensor

资金

  1. Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL)-University of California Directed Research and Development Fund

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Adsorption equilibrium and kinetics of Bacillus subtilis spores on single-walled carbon nanotube aggregates were investigated to explore the possibility of using single-walled carbon nanotubes for concentration, detection and removal of pathogens from contaminated water sources. Batch adsorption experiments were conducted to determine adsorption kinetics and adsorption equilibrium of B. subtilis spores on single-walled carbon nanotube aggregates, activated carbon and NanoCeram (TM). The adsorption kinetics data were analyzed with both the Lagergren pseudo first order and a pseudo second order models. The adsorption equilibrium data on three porous media were quantified by the Henry's law constant. It was observed that both the Lagergren first order rate model and the pseudo second order model correlate the adsorption kinetic data well although the calculated adsorption rate constants vary with adsorbate concentrations. The Henry's law adsorption equilibrium constant of B. subtilis spores on single-walled carbon nanotube aggregates is about 27-37 times higher than those on activated carbon and NanoCeram (TM). The high adsorption affinity of carbon nanotubes towards the B. subtilis spores is due to the mesoporous structure and unique surface properties of carbon nanotubes. These results suggest that single-walled carbon nanotube aggregates are good candidates as biosensors and adsorbent media for concentrating, detecting and removal of pathogens from contaminated water resources. (C) 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据