4.7 Article

Degradation of norfloxacin by hydroxylamine enhanced fenton system: Kinetics, mechanism and degradation pathway

期刊

CHEMOSPHERE
卷 270, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.chemosphere.2020.129408

关键词

Norfloxacin; Antibiotics; Advanced oxidation process; Hydroxylamine enhanced fenton; Hydroxyl radical

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [51978368]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study demonstrated a fast and efficient degradation of the antibiotic norfloxacin in a hydroxylamine enhanced Fenton system, proposing three main degradation steps including defluorination, quinolone group transformation, and defluorination and piperazinyl ring opening. The crucial degradation step was identified as the defluorination process.
This study demonstrated a fast and efficient degradation of a typical antibiotic norfloxacin (NOR) in a hydroxylamine enhanced Fenton (HA-Fenton) system, which showed a higher catalytic activity over a wider pH range (3.0-9.0). The removal efficiency of NOR was 96% at following conditions: 10 mg/L NOR, 10 mM Fe2+, 1.0 mM H2O2, 0.4 mM HA and pH 5.0. The degradation rate of NOR in the HA-Fenton system (0.23 min(-1)) was 10.9 times of that (0.021 min(-1)) in Fenton system. The addition of HA to Fenton system accelerated the conversion of Fe3+ to Fe2+, leading to the high concentration of $OH in the HA-Fenton system. Ten degradation transformation products were detected by ultra-performance liquid chromatography tandem quadrupole time of flight mass spectrometer (UPLC-QTOF-MS), consequently, three main degradation steps were proposed, including defluorination, quinolone group transformation, and defluorination and piperazinyl ring opening. Further analyses of NO3-, NO2- and F- after the reaction indicated that defluorination process was the crucial degradation step. The HA-Fenton system might offer an efficient alternative for degradation of antibiotics in wastewater. (C) 2020 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

4.7
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