4.4 Article

Green Synthesis of Stannic Oxide Nanoparticles for Ciprofloxacin Degradation: Optimization and Modelling Using a Response Surface Methodology (RSM) Based on the Box-Behnken Design

期刊

JOURNAL OF CLUSTER SCIENCE
卷 34, 期 1, 页码 121-133

出版社

SPRINGER/PLENUM PUBLISHERS
DOI: 10.1007/s10876-021-02198-y

关键词

Ciprofloxacin; Green synthesis; Stannic oxide; Gum acacia; Nanoparticles; Photocatalytic activity

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In this study, stannic oxide nanoparticles were synthesized using the polysaccharide extract of gum acacia. The synthesized nanoparticles were characterized, and their potential for photocatalytic degradation of ciprofloxacin was investigated. Optimized conditions were determined, and the results showed that the efficiency of ciprofloxacin removal reached 99.7%.
In this work, stannic oxide (SnO2) nanoparticles were biologically synthesized utilizing the polysaccharide extract of gum acacia by performing the calcination of stannous chloride precursors at 450 degrees centigrade. The confirmation of SnO2 nanoparticles was done through various characterizations. Making use of the Scherer formula within the XRD analysis, the dimensions confirmed for the synthesized nanoparticles of SnO2 was obtained to be 4.66 nm. SnO2 NPs are 4.22 nm in size, according to TEM images. ciprofloxacin is a frequently utilized antibiotic as well as exclusive therapy for bacterial infections, and not viral pathogens. In this report, ciprofloxacin photocatalytic degradation in presence of stannic oxide was investigated, which was confirmed by the UV-Vis characterization. The results also optimized using RSM optimization and indicated that the efficiency of ciprofloxacin removal is 99.7% under the optimum conditions of experimental factors (catalyst concentration (R1) in 50 mg/L, ciprofloxacin dose (R2) in 0.5 g/L, and Reaction time (R3) in 120 min). These results suggest that these nanoparticles possess great potential for removing ciprofloxacin from aqueous solutions.

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

4.4
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