4.7 Article

Extracellular Polymeric Substances Facilitate the Adsorption and Migration of Cu2+ and Cd2+ in Saturated Porous Media

期刊

BIOMOLECULES
卷 11, 期 11, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/biom11111715

关键词

extracellular polymeric substances; porous media; heavy metals; adsorption; simulation; migration

资金

  1. National Major R&D Program of China [2018YFC1800904]
  2. Major R&D Project of Liaoning Province [2020JH2/10300083]
  3. 111 Project [B16020]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The study shows that EPS has a good adsorption capacity for Cu2+ and Cd2+, promoting the migration of these heavy metals in subsurface porous media. Under the experimental conditions, EPS showed a greater affinity for Cu2+ than for Cd2+, and saturating the sand media can significantly enhance the migration of these metals.
Heavy metal contamination in groundwater is a serious environmental problem. Many microorganisms that survive in subsurface porous media also produce extracellular polymeric substances (EPS), but little is known about the effect of these EPS on the fate and transport of heavy metals in aquifers. In this study, EPS extracted from soil with a steam method were used to study the adsorption behaviors of Cu2+ and Cd2+, employing quartz sand as a subsurface porous medium. The results showed that EPS had a good adsorption capacity for Cu2+ (13.5 mg/g) and Cd2+ (14.1 mg/g) that can be viewed using the Temkin and Freundlich models, respectively. At a pH value of 6.5 & PLUSMN; 0.1 and a temperature of 20 & DEG;C, EPS showed a greater affinity for Cu2+ than for Cd2+. The binding force between EPS and quartz sand was weak. The prior saturation of the sand media with EPS solution can significantly promote the migration of the Cu2+ and Cd2+ in sand columns by 8.8% and 32.1%, respectively. When treating both metals simultaneously, the migration of Cd2+ was found to be greater than that of Cu2+. This also demonstrated that EPS can promote the co-migration of Cu2+ and Cd2+ in saturated porous media.

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