4.8 Article

QSARs to predict adsorption affinity of organic micropollutants for activated carbon and β-cyclodextrin polymer adsorbents

期刊

WATER RESEARCH
卷 154, 期 -, 页码 217-226

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.watres.2019.02.012

关键词

Micropollutant; Adsorption; Distribution coefficient; Activated carbon; beta-cyclodextrin polymer

资金

  1. Cornell University's David R. Atkinson Center for a Sustainable Future
  2. National Science Foundation [CHE-1541820]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The removal of organic micropollutants (MPs) from water by means of adsorption is determined by the physicochemical properties of the adsorbent and the MPs. It is challenging to predict the removal of MPs by specific adsorbents due to the extreme diversity in physicochemical properties among MPs of interest. In this research, we established Quantitative Structure-Activity Relationships (QSARs) between the physicochemical properties of a diverse set of MPs and their distribution coefficients (K-D ) measured on coconut shell activated carbon (CCAC) and porous beta-cyclodextrin polymer (P-CDP) adsorbents. We conducted batch experiments with a mixture of 200 MPs and used the data to calculate K-D values for each MP on each adsorbent under conditions of infinite dilution (i.e., low adsorbate concentrations). We used computational software to calculate 3656 molecular descriptors for each MP. We then developed and applied a model-selection workflow to identify the most significant molecular descriptors for each adsorbent. The functional stability and predictive power of the resulting QSARs were confirmed with internal cross validation and external validation. The applicability domain of the QSARs was defined based on the most significant molecular descriptors selected into each QSAR. The QSARs are predictive tools for evaluating adsorption-based water treatment processes and provide new insights into CCAC and P-CDP adsorption mechanisms. (C) 2019 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